On Wed, 27 Nov 2013 22:08:09 -0200 Lucas De Marchi <lucas.demar...@profusion.mobi> said:
> On Wed, Nov 27, 2013 at 9:50 PM, Carsten Haitzler <ras...@rasterman.com> > wrote: > > On Wed, 27 Nov 2013 12:33:35 -0200 Lucas De Marchi > > <lucas.demar...@profusion.mobi> said: > > > >> On Wed, Nov 27, 2013 at 11:57 AM, Carsten Haitzler <ras...@rasterman.com> > >> wrote: > >> > On Wed, 27 Nov 2013 11:51:28 -0200 Gustavo Sverzut Barbieri > >> > <barbi...@gmail.com> said: > >> > > >> >> On Mon, Nov 25, 2013 at 10:16 PM, Carsten Haitzler > >> >> <ras...@rasterman.com> wrote: > >> >> > On Mon, 25 Nov 2013 17:05:55 -0200 Gustavo Sverzut Barbieri > >> >> > <barbi...@gmail.com> said: > >> >> > > >> >> >> On Mon, Nov 25, 2013 at 10:01 AM, Cedric BAIL <cedric.b...@free.fr> > >> >> >> wrote: > >> >> >> > On Mon, Nov 25, 2013 at 12:30 PM, Tom Hacohen > >> >> >> > <tom.haco...@samsung.com> wrote: > >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> This reminds me. Let's git rid of this changelog and news > >> >> >> >> none-sense already. > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > Sounds like a good move... when we will have a proven record of > >> >> >> > usable commit message to generate a ChangeLog and NEWS from it ! > >> >> >> > >> >> >> it would be very beautiful to spot bad committers, not only bad > >> >> >> messages: > >> >> >> > >> >> >> Raster(1234): > >> >> >> Fix stuff > >> >> > > >> >> > no such commit log from me (not in efl, elm or e) > >> >> > > >> >> >> dbg-- > >> >> > > >> >> > yes - and that tells you want you need to know. removing debugging. > >> >> > everythng you need is there. i don't see why it needs to be more > >> >> > descriptive. also no such commit log in e, efl or elm > >> >> > > >> >> >> Fix break due remove dbg > >> >> > > >> >> > and again - told you what you need to know (and no such commit log as > >> >> > above > >> >> > - i searched and found none of these). > >> >> > > >> >> > i wrote all my commit logs ASSUMING people digest them via the svn > >> >> > comits list. that means they get the log AND the diff below. if the > >> >> > diff is trivial why should i repeat in the log what the diff already > >> >> > says ? git log -U will do the same. i always did it this way to save > >> >> > repeating information you already have, but it seems everyone likes > >> >> > to not use the information they already have. > >> >> > >> >> The best (or worse) part of this is that you didn't get the joke. The > >> >> problem was not the commit messages, rather the commits themselves. > >> >> The above should be like: "Fix stuff" only, not the following 2 > >> >> commits that are useless and could be avoided if you didn't push to > >> >> git after every commit, instead get them tested and reviewed, being > >> >> pushed in a batch afterwards when you're sure work is good. > >> > > >> > try reviewing the backlog of patch reviews first before suggesting every > >> > dev needs to put their commits in for review first. considering the small > >> > volume of patches there gets ignored for days or weeks at a time... just > >> > wait for the total zero-movement efl and e will do if its done your way. > >> > >> I don't think he's saying for you to send your commits through > >> phabricator or anything like that. The point is... you can git commit, > >> then test stuff, do something more, commit again, etc, etc, etc. And > >> if it happens to be "oohh... I did a bad commit before", you can just > >> squash the commit... After all that you can git push. no need to add > >> new commits on top with just printf-- > > > > "get them tested and reviewed" reads to say to get them tested and > > reviewed.. by others. at least in english it does. :) > > So in English there's no way to say "review your own commits before > pushing?" ;-) yes there is. "review your commits" as opposed to "get your commits reviewed". the second is a passive construction - the meaning is to have someone (ales) review your commits. the first is to say "go review them". > This is one thing that's very different from svn that may take a while > to get used to... you can commit, write a good message and wait a > little bit before publishing that to others. but your phab tickets wont be closed by the commit until you push. and i have found many times that a commit doesnt always close them. i haven't figured out why yet (the pattern). did i just not wait long enough? was it because the fix was in a project not listed in the assciated projects? i don't know. but i push to get the ticket closed... so i know it will auto-close by commit or i have to manually close it before moving on. > You can commit and then "git show" to see if everything is in place, > there's no printf left, etc etc. > > Lucas De Marchi > -- ------------- Codito, ergo sum - "I code, therefore I am" -------------- The Rasterman (Carsten Haitzler) ras...@rasterman.com ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Rapidly troubleshoot problems before they affect your business. Most IT organizations don't have a clear picture of how application performance affects their revenue. With AppDynamics, you get 100% visibility into your Java,.NET, & PHP application. Start your 15-day FREE TRIAL of AppDynamics Pro! http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=84349351&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk _______________________________________________ enlightenment-devel mailing list enlightenment-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-devel
