| 1 |
On Tue, Aug 11, 2015 at 7:35 AM, Kent Fredric <kentfredric@×××××.com> wrote: |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
> On 12 August 2015 at 02:28, Ian Stakenvicius <axs@g.o> wrote: |
| 4 |
> > Stuff like 'cat/pn: version bumps', 'cat/pn: new features', 'cat/pn: |
| 5 |
> > adjusted dependencies' are generic (and short) enough yet descriptive |
| 6 |
> > enough to see what went on while scanning the log. |
| 7 |
> |
| 8 |
> I personally find those summaries a bit too terse. |
| 9 |
> |
| 10 |
|
| 11 |
Summaries are supposed to be terse, they are summaries ;) |
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
|
| 14 |
> |
| 15 |
> Mostly, because when I see "A version is bumped" I immediately expect |
| 16 |
> to know which version the bump is to, but have to dig out the diff to |
| 17 |
> find out. |
| 18 |
> |
| 19 |
> |
| 20 |
So I thought we used to have scripts that would dig out this information |
| 21 |
and populate them in headers? |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
-A |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
> I would also prefer, where possible, to replace "adjusted |
| 27 |
> dependencies" to be more concise, like "include dev-perl/Foo in |
| 28 |
> dependencies", ( though of course, apply some taste, listing more than |
| 29 |
> 3 distinct new dependencies in the summary is execessive, treat them |
| 30 |
> like hashtags on twitter, 1 is good, 2 is OK, 3 and you're starting to |
| 31 |
> get crazy ) |
| 32 |
> |
| 33 |
> > Multi-package commits are going to be more of an issue of course.. I |
| 34 |
> > did one last night, fortunately I think I can get away with using |
| 35 |
> > "mozilla packages" in place of cat/pn since it is a very specific set |
| 36 |
> > of packages. Perhaps for sweeping changes like that we can use the |
| 37 |
> > herdname or projectname or the category name (if its a particular |
| 38 |
> > category only)? |
| 39 |
> |
| 40 |
> Agreed. If you need multi-package changes and you can't think of a |
| 41 |
> good category prefix to use, the commit message should visibly |
| 42 |
> acknowledge that its a multi-package commit of some kind, and the |
| 43 |
> *kind* of change should be very clear. |
| 44 |
> |
| 45 |
> Just keep in mind really the recommendations for prefix naming are |
| 46 |
> descriptive, not prescriptive, and interpretation and good taste need |
| 47 |
> to be applied everywhere. |
| 48 |
> |
| 49 |
> |
| 50 |
> |
| 51 |
> -- |
| 52 |
> Kent |
| 53 |
> |
| 54 |
> KENTNL - https://metacpan.org/author/KENTNL |
| 55 |
> |
| 56 |
> |
Archives