Magnus Hagander wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 7, 2010 at 04:41, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> wrote:
> > Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> >> Bruce Momjian wrote:
> >> > Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> >> > > I think this is a bad style to use for commit messages. ?For GIT, a good
> >> > > commit message is a first line being a summary, and a more extensive
> >> > > message below.
> >> >
> >> > That is just too odd. I think I forgot about the summary idea then.
> >> What is odd?
> >> If I was unclear, look at this status page:
> >> http://git.postgresql.org/gitweb?p=postgresql.git;a=shortlog
> >> Note that for your commit it only says "PG_MAJORVERSION:". ?You have to
> >> open the patch's page to see the rest of the message.
> > Well, having the description and then a blank line in the middle just is
> > too odd for too small a group of viewers. ?I might as well just type the
> > commit message as normal and users can see all they can.
> "small group"? I think you are definitely underestimating the number
> of people who use the git interface to view the logs these days.
> And frankly, if you're not using it yourself, you should seriously
> look at it. It's vastly superior to the cvsweb interface. (And as I've
> already shown you, if you're doing it locally on the commandline, then
> it's *very* much nicer and faster than cvs there as well)
What I was doing was to use a several word title even for short commit
messages, but I now hear you initially don't see more than the first
line so for short messages I will just forget about the title.
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> http://momjian.us
+ If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +
In response to
pgsql-committers by date
|Next:||From: Alvaro Herrera||Date: 2010-01-07 13:21:35|
|Subject: Re: pgsql: PG_MAJORVERSION: For simplicity, use
PG_MAJORVERSION rather than|
|Previous:||From: User Bmomjian||Date: 2010-01-07 12:40:53|
|Subject: pg-migrator - pg_migrator: Document renamed vacuumdb --analyze-only |