This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: git: remote: *** The first line of a commit message should be a short description of the change, not a single word.
- From: "Richard Earnshaw (lists)" <Richard dot Earnshaw at arm dot com>
- To: Nathan Sidwell <nathan at acm dot org>, Jonathan Wakely <jwakely dot gcc at gmail dot com>, Martin Liška <mliska at suse dot cz>
- Cc: GCC Development <gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org>, Joseph Myers <joseph at codesourcery dot com>
- Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2020 16:44:56 +0000
- Subject: Re: git: remote: *** The first line of a commit message should be a short description of the change, not a single word.
- References: <email@example.com> <CAH6eHdRad1wHeok6=DLh+B8HMGdi-s=o5wsqcKTTaMV67TDXhw@mail.gmail.com> <firstname.lastname@example.org> <email@example.com>
On 21/01/2020 16:43, Nathan Sidwell wrote:
On 1/21/20 11:38 AM, Richard Earnshaw (lists) wrote:
On 21/01/2020 16:14, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
On Tue, 21 Jan 2020 at 16:03, Martin Liška <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
Can you please remove the hook for user branches likes:
$ git push origin me/filter-non-common
Enumerating objects: 27, done.
Counting objects: 100% (27/27), done.
Delta compression using up to 16 threads
Compressing objects: 100% (14/14), done.
Writing objects: 100% (14/14), 1.77 KiB | 1.77 MiB/s, done.
Total 14 (delta 13), reused 0 (delta 0)
remote: *** The first line of a commit message should be a short
description of the change, not a single word.
remote: error: hook declined to update
! [remote rejected] me/filter-non-common ->
refs/users/marxin/heads/filter-non-common (hook declined)
error: failed to push some refs to 'git+ssh://gcc.gnu.org/git/gcc.git'
Requiring slightly better messages than just a single word doesn't
seem to restrictive to me, even on user branches.
plus it teaches you good practice in a safe area.
I agree. What's more, if you ever want to merge the branch into trunk
you'll need to fix such messages, so why not just get them right in
the first place?
Are you using 'merge' with some meaning other than git merge? because
merging to trunk is verboeten.
In the sense 'integrate' your change into trunk. In practice I mean by
a fast-forward push, of course.