sto.mar@web.de wrote:
@normal (@Anonymous)
Regarding commit messages / further explanations:
I wasn't aware that the complete description would be included
in the commit message; is there a preferred way on
bugs.ruby-lang.org for providing a (suggested) commit message
and additional, more verbose explanations?
Yes, I prefer that, at least. Having to go online or even go
out-of-band into my mail archives to look for the explanation of
change is often inconvenient. Explaining in commit message is
is analogous to the inline-cache in YARV to improve locality :)
Anyways, it is expected for git.git (and linux.git) for commit
messages to be complete enough to justify a change.
To the contrary, I dislike GNU ChangeLog entry style used in
Ruby ("make change"). GNU-style describes what changed; but
what changed should already be obvious from reading a diff.
The "why" is not always obvious, and should be explained.
For Ruby, I try to remember to do both (why and what) because
matz liked GNU-style entries, and nobody complained about my
commit messages being too informative :)
If you wish (and it would make my life as patch applyer easier :)
you may use "git format-patch" to generate the patch with
full commit message or use "git request-pull" to format a pull
request pointing to any anonymously-accessible git server.
I will also try to remember to use --add-author-from option
with "git svn" to give you proper credit :x
(On GitHub there is a natural distinction between the
commit message and the PR description, but not for Redmine.)
For a single change, I prefer the commit message cover everything.
For multiple changes, an overview of the series along with
"git request-pull" helps summarize the changes.