Hi,
how about commit messages which have some resemblance to what the change
actually is about - preferably from a user's point of view, but I'd even
take a developer PoV, but with
bug impact: major (if you use cl_respawn), risk: low-to-moderate LF bug
1706 (finishing up associated issues)
not even _I_ can figure out what it is about and supposed to fix w/o
going to bugzilla.
My suggestion would be to have a short, concise summary in the first
line (user's point of view) and explain any implementation details worth
mentioning in the body of the commit (developer's point of view).
The "severity" and "risk" assessment in the summary also seems to be
counter-productive and uses up most of the conciseness of the summary
already, and we can't seem to decide between impact/severity/risk/bug
impact etc.
This _is_ somewhat annoying to parse.
I know! Maybe we should have a policy and stick to it? ;-)
Regards,
Lars
--
Teamlead Kernel, SuSE Labs, Research and Development
SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, GF: Markus Rex, HRB 16746 (AG Nürnberg)
"Experience is the name everyone gives to their mistakes." -- Oscar Wilde
_______________________________________________________
Linux-HA-Dev: Linux-HA-Dev@lists.linux-ha.org
http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha-dev
Home Page: http://linux-ha.org/
