On Sun, Jun 01, 2008 at 12:38:06AM +0200, Bryan ?stergaard wrote: > On Sun, Jun 1, 2008 at 12:24 AM, Bernd Steinhauser > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > Well, you could just include the information, that git shortlog would > > include. Means one line only. > Good idea, I quite like that actually.
Same. `man 1 git-commit` [1] recommends using a one-line summary of your changes, a blank line, and (as-needed) a more elaborate explanation. Following that would also work out nicely in the subject field of git commit mail. (yes, I slack...) > > So a commit message should have one line as a summary and if needed, more > > information in the following lines. > > BTW, I would vote for including a diffstat. > Might be useful as well. You mean instead of what we currently do, just listing the files modified,changed,removed? > > Do devs actually want ChangeLogs? > > I think, that git log is more flexible anyway, so I would use that, whenever > > possible. > Not really - ChangeLogs are primarily for users the way I see it. The > primary reasons for keeping ChangeLogs at all are that you don't need > to be online (you don't have that problem with git of course but other > scms might require you to be online) and you don't need to learn how > to use a scm. Agreed. :) > Regards, > Bryan ?stergaard [1] http://www.kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-commit.html _______________________________________________ Exherbo-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.exherbo.org/mailman/listinfo/exherbo-dev
