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

Reply via email to