Brad Nicholes wrote:

I understand about the revision numbers and I agree that it is an
important piece of information, but unnecessary on the subject line. The subject line needs to include information that allows one to quickly
sort and prioritize the commits. IMHO, the revision number isn't a
piece of information that helps do that. Once I have determined that
the commit is important enough for me to review, I will certainly open
and view the contents of the message. After I have reviewed the commit
via the message contents and determined that further review is
necessary, that is the point when the revision number becomes *very*
important.


Hm. So would you then remember to add the revision number to the subject line in replies? In my experience, the revision number aids visual threading, whereas the list of changed files is mostly just junk once a conversation about a particular commit gets started.

As far as the "svn commit:" prefix is concerned, it was
redundant information before and I believe that it is still redundant
information. Perhaps "svn:" is all that would be required so that when
a commit message is replied to on the dev@ lists, it is distinguished
from other posts.


There's "svn commit:" and "svn propchange:", so the "commit" isn't quite redundant. I suppose "svn:" and "svn propchange:" are different enough, though, especially as there will (hopefully) be many more commits than propchanges.

-- Brane




Reply via email to