[Patch] contrib/gcc-changelog: Check that PR in subject in in changelog

Tobias Burnus tobias@codesourcery.com
Thu Jun 10 14:07:05 GMT 2021

(Moved to gcc-patches, missed this when I replied to the initial email)

Regarding patch at: https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc/2021-June/236357.html

On 10.06.21 14:45, Jonathan Wakely wrote:

> As well as the "contrig" typo that Florian noticed, the subject says
> "in in" which should be "is in". And it should be CC'd to gcc-patches.
> I like this more than my attempt, however ...
>> --- a/contrib/gcc-changelog/git_repository.py
>> +++ b/contrib/gcc-changelog/git_repository.py
>> @@ -59,8 +59,9 @@ def parse_git_revisions(repo_path, revisions, ref_name=None):
>>              date = datetime.utcfromtimestamp(c.committed_date)
>>              author = '%s  <%s>' % (c.author.name, c.author.email)
>> -            git_info = GitInfo(c.hexsha, date, author,
>> -                               c.message.split('\n'), modified_files)
>> +            message = c.message.split('\n')
>> +            git_info = GitInfo(c.hexsha, date, author, message[0],
>> +                               message[1:], modified_files)
> Doesn't using message[1:] here mean that other checks which currently
> look at all of self.info.lines will no longer check the subject line?
> For example, we have:
>          # Skip Update copyright years commits
>          if self.info.lines and self.info.lines[0] == 'Update copyright years.':
>              return
> This will never match now, because you've extracted that into the
> 'subject' instead.

Well, it never matched before for git_email.py, it only did match for
git_repository.py. I think the difference between your work and mine was
that I started with git_email.py – and you started with git_repository.py.

I now pass again the whole message to git_commit.py – also for emails. I
think that's more consistent when checking for an empty line as second line.

And for the copyright case, I added a testcase :-)

> Aside: We should also have a check that the second line is blank, i.e.
> the commit message is a single line subject, followed by blank,
> followed by the body. And if we enforced that, then message[2:] would
> be better than message[1:].
Added as check – but I pass now all (also subject + '\n' + body) for the
email, which I think it easier to grasp. But as three is always an empty
line for emails (to separate header and body), I cannot add a testcase
for it, unfortunately.

Updated patch enclosed.


Mentor Graphics (Deutschland) GmbH, Arnulfstrasse 201, 80634 München Registergericht München HRB 106955, Geschäftsführer: Thomas Heurung, Frank Thürauf
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: gcc-changelog-v2.diff
Type: text/x-patch
Size: 11026 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/attachments/20210610/cf0d8613/attachment-0001.bin>

More information about the Gcc-patches mailing list