Johannes Schindelin <[email protected]> writes: >> Please include this information in the commit message. It's super >> helpful to find this kind of information about why a patch does what >> it does when encountering a patch later "in the wild" (in git log -S >> output). > > I thought I did include the relevant part? As to the full back story: I > was repeatedly dressed down by Junio in recent attempts to include more > motivation in my commit messages. So I am reluctant to do as you say, > because Junio is the BDFL here.
I do recall discouraging you from including irrelevant rant/whine in the log message a few times in the recent past, and also I do recall you never listening to me. Don't make me an excuse. I think what Jonathan finds helpful is the other half of the story of what you did write in [1/1]. You wrote that it is no longer a shell script and needs to follow a separate calling convention. What was missing from that description that was given in [0/1] is why the original "rebase-in-c" series was done while pretending that the other effort "rebase-i-in-c" did not even exist, which made it necessary to do this change as a separate step. And I tend to agree that it _is_ a relevant story in this case.
