On 11/02/2017 03:00 PM, John Johansen wrote: > ] >> We walked through a merge yesterday with this merge request: >> >> https://gitlab.com/apparmor/apparmor/merge_requests/1 >> >> The audit trail of who merged the code is implicitly present in the >> merge commit. By default, there's no information about who reviewed the >> changes but the merge commit contains a mention of where to find the >> merge request and that page will contain much more info about who >> reviewed which parts of the merge request. >> > That makes the dangerous assumption we keep our infrastructure on gitlab, > and don't endup migrating again (this is the 4 or 5 migration in the > projects history). I would strongly prefer having that information > integral to the commit message. > >> I'm fine with the default merge commit message. I think Steve had an >> issue with the subject line of the default merge commit message. I'll >> let him voice his opposition to it and maybe he'll have a better suggestion. >> I am really not happy with with what I have seen so far. > > Merge branch 'make-variable' into 'master' > > all: Use the MAKE variable > > See merge request apparmor/apparmor!1 > > > uhmm, no that really fails the migration test
Please provide a suggested commit message format that we can all follow. Tyler
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
-- AppArmor mailing list [email protected] Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/apparmor
