2011/5/9 Victor Stinner <victor.stin...@haypocalc.com>: > Hi, > > Commit changelogs are important to understand why the code was changed. > I regulary use hg blame to search which commit introduced a particular > line of code, and I am always happy if I can find an issue number > because it usually contains the whole story. > > And since the migration to Mercurial, we have also a great tool adding a > comment to an issue if the changelog contains an issue number (e.g. > changelog starting with "Issue #118888: ..."). So if someone watchs an > issue (is in the nosy list), (s)he will be noticed that a related commit > was pushed. It is not exactly something new: we already do that with > Subversion except that today it is more automatic. > > I noticed that some recent commits don't contain the issue number: > please try to always prefix your changelog with the issue number. It is > not "mandatory", but it helps me when I dig the Python history. > > -- > > For merge commits: many developers just write "merge" or "merge 3.1". I > have to go to the parent commit (and something to the grandparent, > 3.1->3.2->3.3) to learn more about the commit.
I thought the whole point of merging was that you brought a changeset from one branch to another. This why I just write "merge" because otherwise you're technically duplicating information that is pulled onto the branch by merging. It seems like something that should be solved by tools like a display visual graph indicating what is merged. (like Bazaar) -- Regards, Benjamin _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com