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:
>> 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)
In response to
pgsql-committers by date
|Next:||From: Bruce Momjian||Date: 2010-01-07 12:38:55|
|Subject: pgsql: Rename new vacuumdb option to --analyze-only from --only-analyze.|
|Previous:||From: User Itagaki||Date: 2010-01-07 07:59:37|
|Subject: pgbulkload - pgbulkload: Refine messages and option handleing routines |