Re: Summarizing the purpose of a change.

[Karl Fogel <kfogel@red-bean.com>]

Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> writes:
>> > In many projects, there is a convention of summarizing the purpose of a
>> > change in one or two sentences at the start of the log entry.  This
>> > makes the rest of the log entry (and the change itself) easier to
>> > understand.
>> 
>> > Could we try that in Emacs?  Or is there some reason we don't do it?
>> 
>> I do this every time.  So far, nobody's complained.
>
> I do this when I commit large sets of changes.  It could be a nuisance
> to do that for simple changes in a single file, though.

Yup.  I'm talking about just the situation where a summary is necessary.
For an easy fix in a single file, the technical description of the
change can also be the summary -- no one needs more.  Only when the
change is not its own summary is a summary is needed.

So far, everyone who's chimed in has basically said "Yeah, I try to do
this".  But my question is more about making it policy, in the sense
that of making it appropriate to follow up to change saying "How about a
summary line for that?"

-K