Re: Codifying/Documenting Guix commit message conventions?

[Andreas Enge <andreas@enge.fr>]

Hello,

thanks for bringing up the question!

Am Thu, Jun 27, 2024 at 07:04:49PM -0400 schrieb Richard Sent:
> Meanwhile in Guix commit messages, [foo] seems to be used to refer to a
> subset of a larger part [2]:
> From what I'm seeing, the GNU Changelog convention is to indicate
> subsets using <> [3].

I also just follow what I see in other commit messages; so probably some
of my (and other people's) commit messages are "wrong"...

We seem to use <> for a second level of subdivision after [].

> 1. Is this in fact a discrepency between the GNU ChangeLog format and
> Guix convention or am I missing something?

I think it is a difference.

> [fixes TROVE-...] blocks added to certain header lines. What other tags
> exist? There seems to be inconsistency here when referring to multiple
> CVEs. For example, when a fixes tag references multiple CVEs you can
> find.
> 
> [fixes CVE-2020-10700, CVE-2020-10704]  [5]
> [fixes CVE-2020-3898 & CVE-2019-8842]   [6]
> [fixes CVE-2023-{28755, 28756}]         [7]

This probably happens rarely enough that no single convention has
mendelled out yet.

> I'm happy to write up documentation on best practices, but I figure a
> general post on guix-devel is a good idea to make sure nothing's missed.

From my point of view, it would be nice if you could try to come up with
a set of rules that capture the observed practice, and propose a patch to
add them as a section to the manual (somewhere in the chapter that speaks
about contributing).

Andreas