On Fri, Nov 6, 2009 at 7:18 PM, Loui Chang wrote:

On Fri 06 Nov 2009 18:51 +0100, Ronald van Haren wrote:

...

On Fri, Nov 6, 2009 at 6:46 PM, Loui Chang wrote:

...

Hey TUs, Please make descriptive commit messages when committing changes to SVN. I've seen a lack of messages, or cryptic ones like 'FS#1234'. Please describe the change, or the issue it's solving in plain language.

Thanks.

FS#1234 - ypbind-mt needs to be upgraded on cvs

it was fixed in August of 2004 :-p

That's just an example of the types of messages that are committed. I didn't bother recording the actual numbers, so I just wrote 1234. Maybe 9999 would have been more obvious. Anyways I hope you are not confused and you understand my point.

gheh lol, I understood your point (note the ':-p' after my message). Either way, most of the time I agree it's a good idea to put a simple message after the bug idea, as long we don't write whole stories (there is the bug report for that). It makes it eassier to spot things of interest, I don't know bug numbers by heart. Ronald

2009/11/7 Andrea Scarpino :

...

Hey TUs, Please make descriptive commit messages when committing changes to SVN. I've seen a lack of messages, or cryptic ones like 'FS#1234'. Please describe the change, or the issue it's solving in plain language. When you read 'FS#1234' as commit message I think you understand that it means "fixed bug report #1234". So, if you want to investigate on

On 06/11/2009, Loui Chang wrote: that commit you have a wonderful page on flyspray.

Still, the first line of commit message is there to give a fast overview what happened, only have to check the wonderful flyspray if you are interested. For Loui's example: you'd have to check every single commit manually. Also, the fix many times not directly what the bug report is about - but what was uncovered during the bug-report discussion. Thus not only have to check the bug report header, but the whole thing every time.... Is it hard to spend an extra 5 second to write a short summary to keep the good practice and also save other people minutes? Just an opinion... Greg

On Fri, Nov 6, 2009 at 13:36, Loui Chang wrote:

Commit messages should explain the commit, clarify reasons for it and not fully rely on outside reference.

At least for most of my updates, it's nothing more than pkgver/md5 changes. Do I really need to elaborate beyond the summary line?

On 11/06/2009 09:09 PM, Ray Rashif wrote:

2009/11/7 Daenyth Blank>

...

On Fri, Nov 6, 2009 at 13:36, Loui Chang wrote:

...

Commit messages should explain the commit, clarify reasons for it and not fully rely on outside reference.

At least for most of my updates, it's nothing more than pkgver/md5 changes. Do I really need to elaborate beyond the summary line?

-m "Updated foo to 1.24 from 1.23" should suffice in that case and qualify as "explanation-cum-clarification" :)

the default message is "updpkg: $pkname $pkgver" i really like that in this thread only TUs to participate. i'm totally agree with you Loui. I'll try my best in the future to add descriptive messages. -- Ionut

On Fri, Nov 06, 2009 at 08:32:31PM +0100, Chris Brannon wrote:

Ionut Biru wrote:

...

the default message is "updpkg: $pkname $pkgver"

communitypkg doesn't prompt for a message. I stopped using it during the cvs -> svn transition, because I didn't have a version that used svn. The nice thing about calling svn commit directly is that it prompts you for a commit message, and even spawns an editor so you can write it. There is no "default". Yay for doing things by hand!

-- Chris

I think communitypkg pops up a window on my machine asking for commit message. I was using it, but just with the short cryptic messages Loui mentioned. I promise I will change this :) Cheers Jaroslav -- "Plan to throw one away. You will anyway." - Fred Brooks, "The Mythical Man Month"

Xyne wrote:

Chris Brannon wrote:

...

...

the default message is "updpkg: $pkname $pkgver" communitypkg doesn't prompt for a message. I stopped using it during

Ionut Biru wrote: the cvs -> svn transition, because I didn't have a version that used svn. The nice thing about calling svn commit directly is that it prompts you for a commit message, and even spawns an editor so you can write it. There is no "default". Yay for doing things by hand!

-- Chris

I've been using my own scripts to handle build->upload->commit. I'll tweak those to prompt for commit messages instead of appending whatever default message I've been using.

Why? What is wrong with the scripts in devtools? It is just 'makechrootpkg' followed by 'communitypkg "message"'. You are lucky Aaron is on holiday because people not using those scripts is one of his pet peeves. :)

Why? What is wrong with the scripts in devtools? It is just 'makechrootpkg' followed by 'communitypkg "message"'.

You are lucky Aaron is on holiday because people not using those scripts is one of his pet peeves. :)

I wrote my own during the transition before the old ones were updated to handle SVN. They plug into the system which I use to update the projects on my site and they work as expected. There's no reason not to use them right now. Now stop bumping this so it can get buried before I have to dodge falling cars. :P