On Fri, Jul 12, 2019 at 1:25 PM Michael Paquier <mich...@paquier.xyz> wrote: > On Thu, Jul 11, 2019 at 09:44:07AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > > I thought we *did* have an agreement, to wit using > > > > Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/<message-id> > > > > to link to relevant mail thread(s). Some people use more tags > > but that seems inessential to me. > > Hehe. I actually was thinking about advocating for having more of > them in the commit logs. I'll just start a new thread about what I > had in mind. Perhaps that will lead us nowhere, but let's see.
[Moving to -hackers] Here are the tags that people have used in the past year, in commit messages: 763 Author 9 Authors 144 Backpatch-through 55 Backpatch 14 Bug 14 Co-authored-by 27 Diagnosed-By 1593 Discussion 42 Doc 284 Reported-By 5 Review 8 Reviewed by 456 Reviewed-By 7 Security 9 Tested-By Other things I've noticed: * a few people list authors and reviewers in prose in a fairly mechanical paragraph * some people put back-patch and bug number information in prose * a few people list authors and reviewers with full email addresses * some people repeat tags for multiple values, others make comma separated lists * some people break long lines of meta-data with newlines * authors "X and Y" may be an alternative to "X, Y", or imply greater collaboration The counts above were produced by case-insensitively sorting and counting unique stuff that precedes a colon, and then throwing out those used fewer than three times (these are false matches and typos), and then throwing out a couple of obvious false matches by hand. Starting from here: git log --since 2018-07-14 | \ grep -E '^ *[A-Z].*: ' | \ sort -i | \ sed 's/:.*//' | \ uniq -ic | \ grep -v -E '^ *[12] ' -- Thomas Munro https://enterprisedb.com