Commit messages and the move to git

[Nicholas Krause]

On 11/18/19 12:23 PM, Nicholas Krause wrote:
>
> On 11/18/19 12:20 PM, Nicholas Krause wrote:
>>
>> On 11/18/19 12:11 PM, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
>>> Hi Richard,
>>>
>>> On Mon, Nov 18, 2019 at 04:48:03PM +0000, Richard Earnshaw (lists) 
>>> wrote:
>>>> On 18/11/2019 15:55, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
>>>>> That immediately shows some of the shortcomings of this approach: the
>>>>> subject line is much too long, but more importantly, it doesn't make
>>>>> much sense: it is not what the patch does, it is the description of a
>>>>> bug that is related in some way to this patch.  It is not uncommon 
>>>>> for
>>>>> a commit to not fix the problem mentioned in the bug report (if it 
>>>>> *is*
>>>>> a problem!), or not fix it completely.
>>>>>
>>>>> Then again, changing all such subject lines to read "patch" could 
>>>>> also
>>>>> already be considered an improvement.
>>>> Well the real question is whether such a summary is worse than the
>>>> current situation of just printing the author in the wrong field.  I
>>>> personally don't think it is.
>>> I think that non-obviously-wrong-but-still-wrong info is not something
>>> we should introduce.  And, I think this will happen a *lot*.
>>>
>>> Maybe you can just put in artificial subjects like "Patch related to
>>> PR12345" or the like?  That is correct, displays a lot better, and is
>>> at least as useful (imo).
>>
>> I don't see but other projects  mention PRS or Bugzilla ids but
>>
>> more common in my experience is just mentioned the commit
>>
>> ids. For example this fixes commit id x introducing PR x. Commit
>>
>> ids are know good so having them linked in commit messages
>>
>> is much easier to track then PRs, I can just use git log -p commit id.
>>
>>>
>>>> There are about 560 commits where the code highlights that the data
>>>> might be suspect (usually a category mismatch).
>>> What about commits that mention multiple PRs?  What do you do for 
>>> those?
>>> (Are there as many of those as I think, anyway?)Â  With normally very 
>>> short
>>> subjects you could put all of them in there :-)
>>
>> See my above but for this you would just state the main issue(s) in 
>> the commit
>>
>> message and in the body what commits/PRs are being handled.
>>
>> Not sure if that works for everyone but that's normally the best way 
>> in my
>>
>> experience,
>>
>> Nick
>>
>> Sorry but cced the others as this was a misclick.

One of the emails CCed was boucing so I just fixed that as well.

Nick

>>
>>>
>>> Segher