On Fri, 2017-07-14 at 23:19 +0530, Kaartic Sivaraam wrote:
> * Imagine a hypothetical version of git that aborts when the
> <message> is empty though a <trailer> is present. This would
> quite possibly instigate controversies as the "hypothetical git"
> reduces the "valid commit messages" and would quite possibly
> reject a commit message as "empty" (which is uncommunicative)
> though a previous version (which did not have this change)
> accepted a similar message.
>
> SO, bringing in the Occam's razor, let's choose the option that's
> the simplest and makes the fewest assumptions.
I would like to add a little to the "making fewer assumptions" point.
If we make the fewest assumptions possible, it has quite a few
advantages,
* It would make the implementation that checks for an empty message,
trivial. Thus reducing the complexity of the code.
* It would not overload the meaning of the error message,
Aborting due to empty commit message.
Thus making the sentence stand for what it means "literally".
(BTW, I guess an "an" is missing in the message)
* It allows for others to have more freedom in defining what a commit
message should have using the appropriate hook(s). IOW, let us do the
minimal check(message consisting only of whitespaces) and let the
others define what a commit message should have using the "commit-msg"
hook.
--
Kaartic
