| 1 |
11.08.2015 17:36, hasufell пишет: |
| 2 |
> On 08/11/2015 04:28 PM, Ian Stakenvicius wrote: |
| 3 |
>> On 11/08/15 04:57 AM, Tobias Klausmann wrote: |
| 4 |
>>> The more we stuff into the summary line, the harder it will be to |
| 5 |
>>> write meaningful summaries. And thus, people will write crappy ones |
| 6 |
>>> or ignore the length limit. I recommend against any more |
| 7 |
>>> prescription over "Add the the cat/pn if meaningful, don't use more |
| 8 |
>>> than 75 characters". |
| 9 |
>>> The cat/pn rule is tricky anyway: what if one commit touches 100 |
| 10 |
>>> packages? Or should that be split into 100 commits for easier |
| 11 |
>>> partial rollback? |
| 12 |
>>> Regards, Tobias |
| 13 |
>> |
| 14 |
>> |
| 15 |
>> The summary line limit is going to be a real issue, tbh. I think it |
| 16 |
>> would probably be best to adopt the convention of putting a few |
| 17 |
>> choice, perhaps even canned, phrases in the summary line, and ensure |
| 18 |
>> any and all details (effectively what the summary line used to be for |
| 19 |
>> when it had practically no limit) within the commit message body instead |
| 20 |
>> . |
| 21 |
>> |
| 22 |
>> Stuff like 'cat/pn: version bumps', 'cat/pn: new features', 'cat/pn: |
| 23 |
>> adjusted dependencies' are generic (and short) enough yet descriptive |
| 24 |
>> enough to see what went on while scanning the log. 'Fix bug' IMO in |
| 25 |
>> the summary doesn't work at all because, although its accurate, that |
| 26 |
>> bug could literally be anything at all. |
| 27 |
>> |
| 28 |
>> Multi-package commits are going to be more of an issue of course.. I |
| 29 |
>> did one last night, fortunately I think I can get away with using |
| 30 |
>> "mozilla packages" in place of cat/pn since it is a very specific set |
| 31 |
>> of packages. Perhaps for sweeping changes like that we can use the |
| 32 |
>> herdname or projectname or the category name (if its a particular |
| 33 |
>> category only)? |
| 34 |
>> |
| 35 |
>> |
| 36 |
>> |
| 37 |
> The "CATEGORY:" prefix is already in the wiki. Interesting idea about |
| 38 |
> projectname/herdname prefix. |
| 39 |
> |
| 40 |
> I've already seen someone (I think ulm) prefixing with [QA]. |
| 41 |
> |
| 42 |
> I don't feel strong about this. IMO, if there is no useful prefix... |
| 43 |
> just don't use any. The lack of prefix will make it obvious that this is |
| 44 |
> a larger change. But project/herd specific prefixes could still make sense. |
| 45 |
> |
| 46 |
Mgorny has commited a fix to live portage |
| 47 |
|
| 48 |
https://github.com/gentoo/portage/commit/46dafadff58da0220511f20480b73ad09f913430 |
| 49 |
|
| 50 |
I think it will be in the tree soon. |
Archives