Subject: Re: re CVS commit mailing list [was: ... BOUNCE ...]
From: Mike Nordell (tamlin@algonet.se)
Date: Wed Feb 07 2001 - 17:15:52 CST
Sam TH asked about my "-1":
> I'm interested in what your objections to this would be. I can
> think of a couple:
>
> 1) Worse log messages. Currently, we put more info in the commit
> email than we do in the CVS log. However, I think that practice is
> the problem, and the solution is to write more in the CVS log.
I don't think that's the solution. Often we commit in context of a recent
discussion on the list. This does not reflect easily into the CVS log unless
you quote *much* text. I think we want CVS commit messages to be short and
to the point.
> 2) More email traffic. Since the messages on the cvs list usually
> include the entire patch, it can get pretty big. But I think that's
> optional, and I don't know if it's actually a problem.
At least to me it would be. As mentioned, if I commit a multi-directory path
it will
result in numerous commit messages that are something like 10-30 seconds
apart. Perhaps this _can_ somehow be solved (by delaying the commit
auto-posts 60-90 seconds for one user to try to consolidate them?) but then
perhaps there are two
indicidual committs...
Besides, if it includes the complete diff, I'll be online tens of minutes
instead of tens of seconds using my bl**dy dial-up. To me that counts.
> Any other problems?
Beside the one I mentioned? :-)
No. If you think it will be worth it, go ahead, but I'll don't like it a
bit. (until proven wrong)
/Mike
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b25 : Wed Feb 07 2001 - 17:30:58 CST