[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: On commit access, patch review, and remaining healthy
From: |
Maxim Cournoyer |
Subject: |
Re: On commit access, patch review, and remaining healthy |
Date: |
Tue, 14 Jun 2022 11:54:30 -0400 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/28.1 (gnu/linux) |
Hello,
zimoun <zimon.toutoune@gmail.com> writes:
> Hi,
>
> On Sat, 11 Jun 2022 at 01:13, Thiago Jung Bauermann <bauermann@kolabnow.com>
> wrote:
>
>> But I do think it's one more source of “friction” for new contributors,
>> and one more thing for us to require that they get right.
>
> [...]
>
>> There's one in the GNU Coding Standards¹:
>
> [...]
>
>> Personally, I think nowadays this purpose is better fulfilled by
>> good commit messages and git blame. Especially with an editor that makes
>> it easy to use them to navigate through history (such as Emacs, but
>> certainly others as well).
>
> I agree that Emacs+Magit among many others make easy to navigate through
> the history. However, the commit messages are probably good enough
> because some Coding Standards are imposed.
>
> Because these standards, it is easy to navigate via grep for instance.
> Git blame is useful once you know exactly what you are looking for.
> Before that, when I try to figure out the logic behind such change, the
> commit messages more or less fixed by the standards are very helpful,
> IMHO.
I agree. I've come to like GNU ChangeLog commit messages because it
forces me to lay down the changes I've worked on, and sometimes I can
spot things that would be better separated in its own commit, or that
was unintentionally left while testing.
When reviewing others' work it also give me a clear trail of what they
did, and I can match the actual changes to their high level description.
> Whatever the style (ChangeLog or anything else), it appears to me a good
> thing to have strong standards.
Agreed!
Thanks,
Maxim
- Re: On commit access, patch review, and remaining healthy, (continued)
- Re: On commit access, patch review, and remaining healthy, Giovanni Biscuolo, 2022/06/08
- Re: On commit access, patch review, and remaining healthy, Arun Isaac, 2022/06/09
- Re: On commit access, patch review, and remaining healthy, Giovanni Biscuolo, 2022/06/10
- Re: On commit access, patch review, and remaining healthy, Maxime Devos, 2022/06/10
- Re: On commit access, patch review, and remaining healthy, Efraim Flashner, 2022/06/10
- Re: On commit access, patch review, and remaining healthy, Giovanni Biscuolo, 2022/06/10
- Re: On commit access, patch review, and remaining healthy, Giovanni Biscuolo, 2022/06/10
- Re: On commit access, patch review, and remaining healthy, Thiago Jung Bauermann, 2022/06/11
- Re: On commit access, patch review, and remaining healthy, Ludovic Courtès, 2022/06/11
- Re: On commit access, patch review, and remaining healthy, zimoun, 2022/06/14
- Re: On commit access, patch review, and remaining healthy,
Maxim Cournoyer <=
- Re: On commit access, patch review, and remaining healthy, Arun Isaac, 2022/06/15
- Re: On commit access, patch review, and remaining healthy, Arun Isaac, 2022/06/13
Re: On commit access, patch review, and remaining healthy, Ricardo Wurmus, 2022/06/12
- Re: On commit access, patch review, and remaining healthy, Giovanni Biscuolo, 2022/06/12
- Re: On commit access, patch review, and remaining healthy, Maxime Devos, 2022/06/12
- Re: On commit access, patch review, and remaining healthy, Giovanni Biscuolo, 2022/06/13
- Re: On commit access, patch review, and remaining healthy, Maxime Devos, 2022/06/13
- Re: On commit access, patch review, and remaining healthy, Giovanni Biscuolo, 2022/06/13
«Reproducibility vs. Replicability: A Brief History of a Confused Terminology», zimoun, 2022/06/14
Re: On commit access, patch review, and remaining healthy, Ricardo Wurmus, 2022/06/12