On Mon, Nov 29, 2010 at 16:26, Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Mon, Nov 29, 2010 at 7:45 AM, Magnus Hagander <mag...@hagander.net> wrote: >>> Let's do both: "This fixes the bug introduced by the foobar patch from Sep >>> 12th (git commitid a2c23897bc). >>> >>> I like to see the date of the referred patch in the commit message, to get >>> an immediate idea of whether it was a 5-year old change or something from >>> the previous day. But the commitid is also nice so you can immediately >>> copy-paste that without reading through the old commit logs. >> >> +1. >> >> Having the git id is very useful, and putting the date in makes it no >> *less* informational than what we had before, if/when we move away >> from git and it's hashes. > > That works for me. But should we make a practice of writing the > ENTIRE SHA-ID rather than an abbreviated form, so that we could more > easily replace 'em later if need be? I think that would be a good > idea for other reasons anyway - it's always possible - though > admittedly unlikely - that a later commit could introduce a conflict > with the first 10 characters, but a conflict with the whole string is > pretty much discountable.
I think that's a good idea. And I suppose this is just going to be cut&paste in (almost?) every case anyway, so it doesn't really change the effort involved.. -- Magnus Hagander Me: http://www.hagander.net/ Work: http://www.redpill-linpro.com/ -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
