Hi, On Thu, Sep 16, 2010 at 3:15 AM, Jonathan Gordon <jdgo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I honestly don't see the point. I don't remember anyone ever > complaining about commit messages except extremely trivial commits, so > really all this would do is slow down actual development and make > committing either more controversial (in that not doing it right could > potentially blow up every time) or more annoying. > I agree in that it might indeed have an overall negative outcome (unless maybe we all do our commits through an interactive script or something like that). However, since the main problem that led to discussion about a commit template is commits like "grumble", I think being able to edit commit messages is a better solution than following a template. We may ask for a minimum amount of information to be present in the commit message though, like for example, stating explicitly the areas of the code touched by the commit, but without imposing a certain structure on this information. That coupled with the ability to edit messages is a better compromise, imho. -- MT
