Stefan Beller <sbel...@google.com> writes: >> Unlike the step 2/4 I commented on, this does explain what this >> wants to do and why, at least when looked from sideways. Is the >> above saying the same as the following two-liner? >> >> An ealier mistake while rebasing to produce 74d4731da1 >> failed to update this BUG message. Fix this. > > I am not sure if it was rebasing, which was executed mistakenly. > So maybe just saying "74d4731da1 contains a faulty BUG > message. Fix it." would do. > > The intent of the longer message was to shed light in how I found > the BUG (ie. I did not see the BUG message, which would ask me > to actually fix a bug, but found it via code inspection), which I > thought was valuable information, too.
I guess that it could be stated in a way to make it valuable, but in the presented text, I somehow found it was making the more important part of the description (i.e. "this patch fixes a mistake made by 74d4731da1") buried and harder to grok. Thanks.
