e.org
Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] requirements for commit messages and PRs
On Thu, Jun 4, 2020 at 7:19 PM Jukka Laitinen wrote:
> But the template in the commit... please, no. I have had enough of those
> in big companies and in the end they are just harmful.
I agree with that!! We shou
On Thu, Jun 4, 2020 at 7:19 PM Jukka Laitinen wrote:
> But the template in the commit... please, no. I have had enough of those
> in big companies and in the end they are just harmful.
I agree with that!! We should not be too rigid and complicated.
The more I think about it, the more I like
The numbered list is reasonable as a guideline and good practise to cover at
least most of those things in free text.
But the template in the commit... please, no. I have had enough of those in big
companies and in the end they are just harmful.
Br,
Jukka
- Jukka
David Sidrane kirjoitti
But I think it would help to stop call then by judgmental names.
You mean like referring to me as the guy with the "lack of working
project experience and vision" . You made this personal.
What do you expect then? Courtesy for your stupid ideas?
But I think it would help to stop call then by judgmental names.
You mean like referring to me as the guy with the "lack of working
project experience and vision" . You made this personal.
But I think it would help to stop call then by judgmental names.
Unless of
course the final one will be god-wonderful :)
Are you implying we should accept that crap with no judgement? Doesn't
work that way. That old template was crap and everyone knows it. I
have no problem judging
But I think it would help to stop call then by judgmental names. Unless of
course the final one will be god-wonderful :)
Are you implying we should accept that crap with no judgement? Doesn't
work that way. That old template was crap and everyone knows it. I
have no problem judging it.
11:25 AM
To: dev@nuttx.apache.org
Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] requirements for commit messages and PRs
> About unilateral decisions: We should not make them. We need to discuss
> and
> vote on things.
The vote will be interesting. What will be the two options? The
current template or that
About unilateral decisions: We should not make them. We need to discuss and
vote on things.
The vote will be interesting. What will be the two options? The
current template or that god-awful one we had for a few days? Is that
what we would be voting on?
on things.
David
-Original Message-
From: Adam Feuer [mailto:a...@starcat.io]
Sent: Thursday, June 04, 2020 10:26 AM
To: dev@nuttx.apache.org
Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] requirements for commit messages and PRs
Or we can say that between the reviewer and the submitter the fields need
to be filled
Very good points there. I like the idea of making it a collaborative
effort between the contributors and the reviewers.
It is a courtesy of the contributor to make their code available to the
world. It is the responsibility of the reviewer/committer to assure
that there is sufficient
On Thu, Jun 4, 2020 at 1:19 PM Gregory Nutt wrote:
> Why don't we require that the reviewer fill in those sections. The main
> reason that they are not filled in now is language barrier issues, not
> willingness to contribute. Forcing someone who has marginal English
> skills to write prose to
Or we can say that between the reviewer and the submitter the fields need
to be filled out? That way it can be a collaboration, and over time
submitters will gain skill in filling the fields out themselves.
+1 for a simple template.
-adam
On Thu, Jun 4, 2020 at 10:19 AM Gregory Nutt wrote:
>
Yes. Simplicity is single most important thing. The entire template
should fit entirely within the PR comment window. It should not be a
punishment to contributors to the project. We will get a better
response if it is simple and usable. No inline instructions, please.
There should not be
On Thu, Jun 4, 2020 at 12:32 PM Gregory Nutt wrote:
> Yes. Simplicity is single most important thing. The entire template
> should fit entirely within the PR comment window. It should not be a
> punishment to contributors to the project. We will get a better
> response if it is simple and
Yes. Simplicity is single most important thing. The entire template
should fit entirely within the PR comment window. It should not be a
punishment to contributors to the project. We will get a better
response if it is simple and usable. No inline instructions, please.
There should not
On Thu, Jun 4, 2020 at 11:54 AM Gregory Nutt wrote:
> >> See
> >> https://github.com/nuttx-to-asf/incubator-nuttx/commit/b496ee7ff9adeaa9020e7b07efed8198d4e8e623
> >>
> >
> > The is HORRIBLE!!! God help us.
> Full disclosure: I am the guy with the "lack of working project
> experience
.
See
https://github.com/nuttx-to-asf/incubator-nuttx/commit/b496ee7ff9adeaa9020e7b07efed8198d4e8e623
The is HORRIBLE!!! God help us.
Full disclosure: I am the guy with the "lack of working project
experience and vision" who correct that original, horrible template.
I did
.
See
https://github.com/nuttx-to-asf/incubator-nuttx/commit/b496ee7ff9adeaa9020e7b07efed8198d4e8e623
The is HORRIBLE!!! God help us.
Let's discuss what is needed in commit messages PRs
1) Effective team communication
2) Have a problem statement
3) Provide reasoning for solution and alternatives
4) Provide test instructions steps for reproduction
5) Provides content usable in release notes.
Here is a straw man with some
20 matches
Mail list logo
