Hi,
I just finished cleaning up the neglected ChangeLog. We all (mostly me and
grothoff) gravely neglected
to update the file (no change since 0.12.1!) and it was quite a pain to go
through the git logs this
time.
In order to prevent this or at least make this easier in the future, it would
be
On Wed, May 27, 2020 at 09:56:27AM +0200, Schanzenbach, Martin wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I just finished cleaning up the neglected ChangeLog. We all (mostly me and
> grothoff) gravely neglected
> to update the file (no change since 0.12.1!) and it was quite a pain to go
> through the git logs this
> time
On 5/27/20 1:58 PM, Daniel Golle wrote:
> Yes, let's please establish something like that. I've tried my best
> myself, but that's like 0.01% of GNUnet commits -- and of course,
> as was pointed out in a previous debate on that, GNUnet is not the
> Linux kernel and experimentation becomes very
> On 27. May 2020, at 10:39, Florian Dold wrote:
>
> On 5/27/20 1:58 PM, Daniel Golle wrote:
>> Yes, let's please establish something like that. I've tried my best
>> myself, but that's like 0.01% of GNUnet commits -- and of course,
>> as was pointed out in a previous debate on that, GNUnet
I would like to add something:
> On 27. May 2020, at 09:56, Schanzenbach, Martin
> wrote:
>
> B. Any other commit
> Please formulate your commit message in a way that makes it understandable
> what component was changed,
> why it was changed and how. Possibly with an issue number if applicable
On 5/27/20 2:46 PM, Schanzenbach, Martin wrote:
> Here, a message of "fix #1234" is NOT sufficient.
> I have done so myself and have found ~50 in the current log since 0.12.1.
> Those are not useful messages. Having to do to mantis to check the changes
> meaning
> is quite annoying. Especially if
> On 27. May 2020, at 11:24, Florian Dold wrote:
>
> On 5/27/20 2:46 PM, Schanzenbach, Martin wrote:
>> Here, a message of "fix #1234" is NOT sufficient.
>> I have done so myself and have found ~50 in the current log since 0.12.1.
>> Those are not useful messages. Having to do to mantis to chec
There are more conventional conventions [conventional-commits] that
might also be considered. Conventional commits uses plain English to
classify types of commit, for example: build, ci, chore, docs, feat,
fix, perf, refactor, revert, style and test.
Example commit message:
---
feat: add thi
Christian Grothoff writes:
> Yes, we should modify the code along the lines of your proposal.
>
> -Christian
Then does the attached patch sound reasonable?
As the commit message says, it adds the 'agpl_url' field and
automatically adds a handler when that field is not NULL. There is also
a pat
On 5/27/20 6:04 PM, Alessio Vanni wrote:
> Then does the attached patch sound reasonable?
Yes, perfect, applied as is.
-Christian
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
10 matches
Mail list logo