On Thu, Mar 9, 2017 at 2:43 PM, Ben Kelly <bke...@mozilla.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 9, 2017 at 5:35 PM, Mike Hommey <m...@glandium.org> wrote: > > > On Thu, Mar 09, 2017 at 02:46:53PM -0500, Ehsan Akhgari wrote: > > > I review a large number of patches on a typical day, and usually I have > > to > > > spend a fair amount of time to just understand what the patch is doing. > > As > > > the patch author, you can do a lot to help make this easier by *writing > > > better commit messages*. Starting now, I'm going to try out a new > > practice > > > for a while: I'm going to first review the commit message of all > patches, > > > and if I can't understand what the patch does by reading the commit > > message > > > before reading any of the code, I'll r- and ask for another version of > > the > > > patch. > > > > Sometimes, the commit message does explain what it does in a sufficient > > manner, but finding out why requires reading the bug, assuming it's > > written there. I think this information should also be in the commit > > message. > > > (Just continuing the thread here.) > > Personally I prefer looking at the bug for the full context and single > point of truth. Also, security bugs typically can't have extensive commit > messages and moving a lot of context to commit messages might paint a > target on security patches. > Can't you determine that by just looking to see if the bug is visible? -Ekr > _______________________________________________ > dev-platform mailing list > dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org > https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform > _______________________________________________ dev-platform mailing list dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform
