On Sunday 23 January 2011, Milian Wolff wrote: > Hey all, > > I've brought this discussion to the sysadmins recently and they asked me to > ask for feedback here. So there it goes: > > Recently, the format of the subject of git commit emails was adapted to use > the old SVN format. This sucks in my opinion and I want to have it changed. > > First lets explain how the git emails where formatted before: > > Before: "gitorious-way" > [$repo] $short-sha1: $pretty=online > > Example: > [KDevPlatform] fafd165: Don't completely ignore the retrieved top-context > > This is how they are formatted now (or well - again, apparently this format > was used in SVN as well): > After: "svn-way" > [$repo/$branch] $min-path > > where $min-path is the common path of *all* changed files, e.g.: > > Example: > [kdevelop/4.2] / > or > [kdevplatform/1.2] documentation > > > So why does this suck: > > a) the path bears no information whatsoever. Esp. when it turns into '/' and > this *does* happen very often. In SVN everything was one repo, hence the path > was useful. But in Git everything is split into repos, so the path bears no > information. > > b) I cannot use quick-seach features of common email applications, like KMail > to search by sha/commit msg. I have to use the fullblown search dialog which > is much slower to use to achieve such a simple task
To me, the short sha is useless, and the cut-off bit of the commit message doesn't tell me anything useful either. I use the path to filter on which part of calligra a commit touches, so it's useful for me. And I use the sender to order messages when I write a last-week-in-krita. So for me, the new format was very welcome. -- Boudewijn Rempt | http://www.valdyas.org, http://www.krita.org