William, Am 26.01.20 um 19:46 schrieb William Dauchy: > On Sun, Jan 26, 2020 at 7:33 PM Tim Düsterhus <t...@bastelstu.be> wrote: >> Backport information are missing (without looking up that commit). 1.8+ >> it is. > > Thanks. Could be nice to change a bit these rules; indeed, when the > `Fixes` tag is present, it's very easy to ask git in which tag this > was introduced; so in my opinion this should be part of a > semi-automatic process proposing to backport a given fix when this tag > is present (`git tag --contains`). > However, I agree that's a bit wonky as a few commits are > cherry-picked, like this one which was cherry-picked in v1.8 indeed. >
Yes, and because this is so easy to look up I simply add both the commit and the first version to my commit message to save the person doing the backporting the brain cycles. Backporting appears to mostly be a bulk process and I can imagine it to be mind-numbing. I can't comment on whether leaving this information out actually makes it harder or not, I'm just a community contributor as well. The CONTRIBUTING file says this, though: > The explanation of the user-visible impact and the need for backporting to stable branches or not are MANDATORY. Best regards Tim Düsterhus
