Hi Wolfgang, I really doubt there will ever be a general agreement on how one should name the patches in an arbitrary repository. As you say, the best is to be consistent within a *single* repository. It is just a matter of style and taste, there's no one style "more right" than another one.
> I often see names like “add README file” This is my own preference, that I try to follow in all my projects. It is effective and terse, and right to the point IMO: in my mental model, feeding such a patch to darcs will cause the appearence of that file. Very often, in the changelog (that is, in the following lines of the message, after the patch name), I expand that "order" giving some explanation, or context, to help the reader/reviewer to understand "why" I felt the need to give that "order"/make that "action". Another example is Fix issue XYZ As explained in the bugtracker, issue XYZ caused some headache. This patch solves the problem changing this and that, so no more analgesic, hopefully. > Another approach is to have names like “added README file” I prefer using the past tense in the CHANGES file, where I usually write a summary of the user visible changes I made from version to version. OTOH, it is formally correct, because by any chance you actually created that README well before you commit the change... :-) Hope this helps, ciao, lele. -- nickname: Lele Gaifax | Quando vivrò di quello che ho pensato ieri real: Emanuele Gaifas | comincerò ad aver paura di chi mi copia. l...@metapensiero.it | -- Fortunato Depero, 1929. _______________________________________________ darcs-users mailing list darcs-users@darcs.net http://lists.osuosl.org/mailman/listinfo/darcs-users
