On Fri, 1 Nov 2019 19:59:35 +0000 Michael 'veremitz' Everitt <gen...@veremit.xyz> wrote:
> Thoughts from outside peanut gallery?
>
> Michael / veremitz.
I have an alternative that might be more pleasant:
1. Change repoman so that when its clear that:
- There is at least one ebuild being changed
- There is only one ebuild being changed
Then the templated summary line is full ${P}
2. Otherwise, retain the current semantics of using a simpler
${P} in other cases.
3. Make no *requirements* that ${P} be used instead of ${PN},
and that way people who think they have a good reason to use ${PN}
instead of ${P} can do just that (if for instance, they need to lop
off context so they can have a longer commit message )
This IMO improves things by default, given that the majority of changes
get run through repoman, and a majority of changes have very terse
requirements for extra data.
It also means that by default, when people just make the commit message
something silly like "bump", or "version bump", despite the fact they
didn't put in much effort, the log defaults to being useful, and the
commit messages relayed to #gentoo-commits improves in usefulness.
Partly, because for me, one of my prime vectors where I become aware
changes are occuring is in #gentoo commits, particularly because
something in there highlights me.
I don't want to *have* to:
- Resync my git repo
- Dig into git wizardry
*just* to ascertain what version was involved, and to then ascertain if
I need to investigate further.
( Because once I've already synced and started using git wizardry, I'm
already starting to pay investigation taxes )
pgpv94J0xya_W.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
