Re: First CommitFest: July 15th

From: Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>
To: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Zdenek Kotala <Zdenek(dot)Kotala(at)sun(dot)com>, Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>
Subject: Re: First CommitFest: July 15th
Date: 2009-07-06 13:12:55
Message-ID: 200907061312.n66DCt921064@momjian.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> On Saturday 04 July 2009 00:54:11 Robert Haas wrote:
> > I think what would be more useful is if we could
> > somehow associated metadata with each commit. Right now, for example,
> > the author of a patch is not stored with the patch in any structured
> > way; it's just typed in, usually but not always as the last line of
> > the commit. So you can't easily find out what lines of code a certain
> > person has touched, for example. The sorts of problems that you're
> > talking about seem broadly in the same vein.
>
> I have been trying to follow a convention on-and-off to put the author of the
> patch in the last line of the commit message, like
>
> Author: First Last <name(at)example(dot)com>

Sure, I can use that format if we decide to be consistent.

> A tool such as git-cvsimport will actually parse that and put it into the
> author field of a git commit. (The tool we use, fromcvs, doesn't do that, but
> it could conceivably be patched easily to do it.)
>
> I also found the following resource helpful in crafting commit messages:
> http://www.tpope.net/node/106

Interesting idea to have a subject line for the commit message.

--
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com

+ If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Atsushi Ogawa 2009-07-06 13:15:05 Reduce the memcpy call from SearchCatCache
Previous Message Greg Stark 2009-07-06 11:28:58 Re: WIP: generalized index constraints