This is now done with this pull request: https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/8091
Committers please update the script to get this "feature". On Mon, Jul 20, 2015 at 12:28 AM, Manoj Kumar < manojkumarsivaraj...@gmail.com> wrote: > +1 > > Sounds like a great idea. > > On Sun, Jul 19, 2015 at 10:54 PM, Sandy Ryza <sandy.r...@cloudera.com> > wrote: > >> +1 >> >> On Sat, Jul 18, 2015 at 4:00 PM, Mridul Muralidharan <mri...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >>> Thanks for detailing, definitely sounds better. >>> +1 >>> >>> Regards >>> Mridul >>> >>> On Saturday, July 18, 2015, Reynold Xin <r...@databricks.com> wrote: >>> >>>> A single commit message consisting of: >>>> >>>> 1. Pull request title (which includes JIRA number and component, e.g. >>>> [SPARK-1234][MLlib]) >>>> >>>> 2. Pull request description >>>> >>>> 3. List of authors contributing to the patch >>>> >>>> The main thing that changes is 3: we used to also include the >>>> individual commits to the pull request branch that are squashed. >>>> >>>> >>>> On Sat, Jul 18, 2015 at 3:45 PM, Mridul Muralidharan <mri...@gmail.com> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Just to clarify, the proposal is to have a single commit msg giving >>>>> the jira and pr id? >>>>> That sounds like a good change to have. >>>>> >>>>> Regards >>>>> Mridul >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Saturday, July 18, 2015, Reynold Xin <r...@databricks.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> I took a look at the commit messages in git log -- it looks like the >>>>>> individual commit messages are not that useful to include, but do make >>>>>> the >>>>>> commit messages more verbose. They are usually just a bunch of extremely >>>>>> concise descriptions of "bug fixes", "merges", etc: >>>>>> >>>>>> cb3f12d [xxx] add whitespace >>>>>> 6d874a6 [xxx] support pyspark for yarn-client >>>>>> >>>>>> 89b01f5 [yyy] Update the unit test to add more cases >>>>>> 275d252 [yyy] Address the comments >>>>>> 7cc146d [yyy] Address the comments >>>>>> 2624723 [yyy] Fix rebase conflict >>>>>> 45befaa [yyy] Update the unit test >>>>>> bbc1c9c [yyy] Fix checkpointing doesn't retain driver port issue >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Anybody against removing those from the merge script so the log looks >>>>>> cleaner? If nobody feels strongly about this, we can just create a JIRA >>>>>> to >>>>>> remove them, and only keep the author names. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>> >> > > > -- > Godspeed, > Manoj Kumar, > http://manojbits.wordpress.com > <http://goog_1017110195> > http://github.com/MechCoder >
