From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: git history tracking across renames (and emacs support) Date: Wed, 11 Jul 2018 11:22:33 +0300 Message-ID: <83muuyfagm.fsf@gnu.org> References: <878te75xa1.fsf@lifelogs.com> <87ind6l2tt.fsf@lifelogs.com> <877etklvsa.fsf@lifelogs.com> <83y3m0pv8u.fsf@gnu.org> <86608msw0h.fsf@dod.no> <838tdiet25.fsf@gnu.org> <87y3li4vh7.fsf@telefonica.net> <87efnan46u.fsf@linux-m68k.org> <86wp12qtgo.fsf@dod.no> <83tvw6chqv.fsf@gnu.org> <86shbprix7.fsf_-_@dod.no> <838t6jgl1k.fsf@gnu.org> <601m6cc6.fsf@lifelogs.com> <83o9fefnv9.fsf@gnu.org> <8736wqmle2.fsf@mbork.pl> NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1531297289 32562 195.159.176.226 (11 Jul 2018 08:21:29 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 11 Jul 2018 08:21:29 +0000 (UTC) Cc: tzz@lifelogs.com, larsi@gnus.org, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Marcin Borkowski Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Jul 11 10:21:25 2018 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by blaine.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1fdANH-0008Mf-VT for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 11 Jul 2018 10:21:24 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:52283 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1fdAPP-00033w-2T for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 11 Jul 2018 04:23:35 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:53788) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1fdAOY-00031G-2x for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 11 Jul 2018 04:22:45 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1fdAOT-00005h-Kb for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 11 Jul 2018 04:22:42 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::e]:46765) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1fdAOT-00005d-Ga; Wed, 11 Jul 2018 04:22:37 -0400 Original-Received: from [176.228.60.248] (port=2544 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1fdAOS-0001Nk-Tm; Wed, 11 Jul 2018 04:22:37 -0400 In-reply-to: <8736wqmle2.fsf@mbork.pl> (message from Marcin Borkowski on Wed, 11 Jul 2018 06:44:37 +0200) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 2001:4830:134:3::e X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "Emacs-devel" Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:227246 Archived-At: > From: Marcin Borkowski > Date: Wed, 11 Jul 2018 06:44:37 +0200 > Cc: Ted Zlatanov , larsi@gnus.org, emacs-devel@gnu.org > > > . How do you explain in CONTRIBUTE what should and what shouldn't be > > in a log message? We have trouble getting contributors to follow > > the current format; this one will leave us no levers to ask them to > > do it correctly, I think. The same situation exists with comments, > > but comments we can fix by followup commits, whereas log messages > > are carved in stone once pushed. > > I don't think CONTRIBUTE is very clear on how to actually make your > commit message comply with the standards anyway. If the text in CONTRIBUTE is unclear or needs more details, your comments and suggestions to improve it will be welcome. > I could try to make some simple change to see where the friction is so > that CONTRIBUTE can be made better, or even create a detailed technical > HOWTO explaining the steps you should take to create a correct commit > message. If you can afford it, please show such an explanation. FWIW, I pretty much certain that it is impossible to provide such instructions and yet keep your goal, because what Ted actually wants is total freedom in what text is written, and to what depth and detail level it should describe the change. IMO and IME, trying to give too specific instructions there will cause someone else, perhaps even yourself, complain that the bar is too high again... But don't let that prevent you from trying to change my mind and the mind of others. Thanks.