Brad Nicholes wrote:
I understand about the revision numbers and I agree that it is an
important piece of information, but unnecessary on the subject line.
The subject line needs to include information that allows one to quickly
sort and prioritize the commits. IMHO, the revision number isn't a
I happen to agree that the commit messages suck, but the right thing
to do is have a look at the script and suggest a patch on the
infrastructure mailing list. I would do it myself, but have a paper
to write first. I also think that placement of the Log text after
the long list of files is
--On Friday, November 19, 2004 6:22 PM -0800 Roy T. Fielding
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I happen to agree that the commit messages suck, but the right thing
to do is have a look at the script and suggest a patch on the
infrastructure mailing list. I would do it myself, but have a paper
I'm sure that last thing that you want to hear is another complaint
after all of the work you have gone to, but I'm not sure just listing
directories is a better compromise. At least before I could see the
difference between CHANGES and STATUS, now I just see trunk which
could be any one of a
--On Friday, November 19, 2004 2:41 PM -0700 Brad Nicholes
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
listings to keep the subject line shorter and more informative. I also
don't need to see svn commit: r at the front of every message. I
already know it is an SVN commit based on the mailing list it came
I understand about the revision numbers and I agree that it is an
important piece of information, but unnecessary on the subject line.
The subject line needs to include information that allows one to quickly
sort and prioritize the commits. IMHO, the revision number isn't a
piece of
Brad Nicholes wrote:
I'm sure that last thing that you want to hear is another complaint
after all of the work you have gone to, but I'm not sure just listing
directories is a better compromise. At least before I could see the
difference between CHANGES and STATUS, now I just see trunk which
