Hi all, >From experience in the past, the initially created PR summary and description do not fully match the eventually merged change. This is why I mentioned "... contributors should review the PR summary and description before opening a PR and committers should really review both the summary and the description of the merge commit, before merging." on the PR ([1] [2])
Having the list of commits in the merge commit message proposed by GitHub helps there. Another aspect are the Renovate PRs: those contain a lot of information in the PR summary that's quite interesting when reviewing those changes, but these PR summaries are not suitable for commit messages. Example: [3] So my vote would be on the current behavior and not change it. Robert [1] https://github.com/apache/polaris/blob/f80b4f373d9ae42ab20ae1b45750d3809fbbe303/CONTRIBUTING.md?plain=1#L93-L94 [2] https://github.com/apache/polaris/blob/f80b4f373d9ae42ab20ae1b45750d3809fbbe303/CONTRIBUTING.md?plain=1#L120 [3] https://github.com/apache/polaris/pull/1888 On Wed, Jul 9, 2025 at 10:32 AM Ajantha Bhat <ajanthab...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Hi all, > While adding the recommendation to working with the PR on site docs, > we have opened an issue https://github.com/apache/polaris/issues/1656 to > update the settings. > > I have discussed with ASF Infra and they mentioned, we can update by > ourselves. > Hence, I opened a PR for the same: > https://github.com/apache/polaris/pull/2016 > > But it looks like we don't have consensus on this change (based on the > comment on the PR). Hence this discussion. > > I personally think it is good to have these settings as default as the > committer work will be reduced if the PR title and description is proper. > I don't see the drawbacks of this approach yet. Please feel free to mention > your opinion on this. > > - Ajantha
