This is the mail archive of the libc-alpha@sourceware.org mailing list for the glibc project.

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format:	[Raw text]

Re: git commit message conventions

From: Paul Eggert <eggert at cs dot ucla dot edu>
To: Florian Weimer <fweimer at redhat dot com>, Torvald Riegel <triegel at redhat dot com>
Cc: Joseph Myers <joseph at codesourcery dot com>, libc-alpha at sourceware dot org
Date: Wed, 03 Jun 2015 10:37:06 -0700
Subject: Re: git commit message conventions
Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
References: <alpine dot DEB dot 2 dot 10 dot 1506022041430 dot 2704 at digraph dot polyomino dot org dot uk> <556E563C dot 1090204 at cs dot ucla dot edu> <1433314909 dot 21461 dot 65 dot camel at triegel dot csb> <556ECDF8 dot 1040107 at redhat dot com>

Florian Weimer wrote:

I completely agree, and I think Joseph's proposal goes in that direction.


Then I'm afraid I misread the direction of the proposal.

I don't much care about whether the commit message uses ChangeLog format or someother format. What I find puzzling, though, is the implication that the commitmessage should differ from the change log and that each should have its ownspecialized format. We should allow change proposals in the form of "gitformat-patch" that log the change just once, and not require two or moreincompatible formats (commit message, ChangeLog delta, git notes, ...) for the log.

Follow-Ups:
- Re: git commit message conventions
  - From: Florian Weimer

References:
- git commit message conventions
  - From: Joseph Myers
- Re: git commit message conventions
  - From: Paul Eggert
- Re: git commit message conventions
  - From: Torvald Riegel
- Re: git commit message conventions
  - From: Florian Weimer

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]