On 01/02/16 13:36, Andres Freund wrote:
On 2016-01-28 06:03:02 -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote:Reported-by: Bug: Author: Reviewed-by: Tested-by: Backpatch-through:I personally, and I realize that I'm likely alone on that, would really like to see references to relevant threads. A year after a commit or such it often starts to get hard to know which threads a commit was about. Often it's easy enough if it's about a single feature, but bugfixes often originate in threads that have no directly corresponding thread. And often the commit happens a while after there's been activity in a thread. I spent days searching what thread "per discussion" in commit messages refers to.
+1. I also quite often look at a commit message, and then hunt the "per discussion". A message-id would save some time there. I've seen you add annotations like that to your commits, which is nice. I'll start doing that myself. You've used the "Discussion: <message-id>" format for that, so I'll go with that too. (Even if the message-id is given in free-form in the paragraphs, that's helpful, but might as well use a fixed form.)
And that's a proposal that's not "we must all do it or it's useless". If half of commit messages include that, then hunting the "per discussion" for those commits becomes easier, and the rest are the same as now.
- Heikki -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
