2011/4/8 Jerome Renard <jerome.ren...@gmail.com>: > Hi Thomas, > > On Fri, Apr 8, 2011 at 11:09 AM, Thomas Nunninger <tho...@nunninger.info> > wrote: >> Hi, >> >> Am Freitag, 8. April 2011 07:50:20 schrieb Jerome Renard: >>> Hi Patrick, >>> >>> On Thu, Apr 7, 2011 at 4:09 PM, Patrick ALLAERT >>> >>> <patrick.alla...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> > 2011/4/1 Tobias Schlitt <tob...@schlitt.info>: >>> >> Hi, >>> >> >>> >> I wrote down our commit guidelines. Please review them shortly, before I >>> >> commit: >>> >> >>> >> http://files.schlitt.info/tmp/commit_guidelines.patch >>> > >>> > Good work Toby! >>> > >>> > I have however a remark regarding: >>> > >>> > +However, larger features or bug fixes, should be split them into smaller >>> > +commits. In this case, the issue number should only occur in the final >>> > commit, +which closes the issue. >>> > >>> > I think having the issue number on the latest commit only might be a >>> > problem for different reasons: >>> > 1. While looking at a commit mentioning an issue ID, you have no clue >>> > whether other commits are required or not to fix that specific issue. >>> > 2. In the case a commit fixing a bug has to be reverted for whatever >>> > the reason, the one which will definitely resolve the problem will >>> > also mention that issue which is not consistent to the guidelines. >>> > 3. In the case a bug issue is reopened, we might have the same problem as >>> > in 2. >>> >>> I already thought about this problem but to be honnest I never found >>> an acceptable >>> solution. The only "solution" I came up with is to write commit log >>> message like this: >>> >>> - Fixed #1234321 part 1 : bla bla bla bla >> >> Perhaps it's possible to come up with some other (fixed) term instead of >> "part >> X" after the issue number. A term that means something like: "not >> finished", "to be continued" or whatever. It shouldn't be to long. Perhaps an >> abbreviation. >> > > Why not, how about something like this ? > > - Fixed #XXX : bla bla bla START > - Fixed #XXX : bla bla bla WIP > [...] > - Fixed #XXX : bla bla bla END
Should we really mention all that info? I would propose to only use: - Fixed #XXX: ... Normal case is generally to fix issues in one single commit. But it happens that a fix does not fully solve the problem and the bug to be reopened. I think we can simply have something like: First commit solving ZETACOMP-XX: "- Fixed #ZETACOMP-XX: Double conversion of HTML entities" Second commit because of a special case not covered by initial fix: "- Fixed #ZETACOMP-XX: Double conversion of HTML entities Covering the case when ..." This way it is quite easy to look (grep) at "Fixed #ZETACOMP-XX:" for commits related to that issue, knowing that all those commits are required to fully fix the problem. Cheers, Patrick -- Patrick Allaert --- http://code.google.com/p/peclapm/ - Alternative PHP Monitor
