On Fri, Oct 10, 2014 at 10:18:53AM +0200, Matthias Kuhn wrote: > I agree with Nathan and Nyall. The commit history isn't a very > "official" thing, so there is some room for attribution and other > additional information. > > Personally I prefer a meaningful commit message with some "spam" in > it over a commit message that contains (almost) no useful > information like "Fix #1234", "Fix #4567 [Meaningless title of an > issue report]" "Followup 65443" (That one is not so bad, but could > be improved with some prose). I often find myself looking at the > commit history to find information about why something was done. > IF something needs to be fixed in the commit log, then we should > rather focus on this than on a bit of pride, fun and attribution.
+1 On a related note, keeping commit lines within 70 columns and separating short description line from long description body with two newlines also helps a lot :) --strk; _______________________________________________ Qgis-developer mailing list [email protected] http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
