| 1 |
>>>>> On Sun, 24 Jan 2016, Michael Orlitzky wrote: |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
> The ChangeLog page is nonsense as-is, and removing it makes the |
| 4 |
> devmanual better. Afterwards, if someone wants to take the commit |
| 5 |
> message guidelines from the wiki and merge them with the old ChangeLog |
| 6 |
> tips, great. There's only two things worth salvaging from the ChangeLog |
| 7 |
> page. Here's the combined list: |
| 8 |
|
| 9 |
> 1. Everything from the Git workflow wiki page "Commit message format" |
| 10 |
> section. |
| 11 |
|
| 12 |
I would say not only that section, but most of the page. The devmanual |
| 13 |
is the one central place where our development workflow should be |
| 14 |
documented, not some random wiki page. |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
> 2. Mention the "Gentoo-Bug:" identifier. |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
Right. (But had we settled for "Gentoo-Bug:"? IIRC, last time this was |
| 19 |
discussed there was no consensus.) |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
> Using "bug #12345" in the commit message itself causes trouble. |
| 22 |
> If you word-wrap on the "#12345", it will silently clobber the |
| 23 |
> message. |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
That's one of the reasons why I have 'commentchar = ";"' in my |
| 26 |
.gitconfig file. (Not sure if that option would be worth mentioning |
| 27 |
in our documentation, though.) |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
> [...] |
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
Ulrich |
Archives