James Vega, 2010-01-29:
> On Fri, Jan 29, 2010 at 12:06:15AM +0100, Markus Heidelberg wrote:
> > Bram Moolenaar, 2010-01-07:
> > >
> > > Let me know if something looks wrong. Once this is "approved" by
> > > vim-dev I'll publish it to a larger audience.
> >
> > Is this the final Vim repository now or do you plan to rewrite it before
> > announcing it officially? Why don't you include the history (patch
> > descriptions) in it?
>
> Patch descriptions are included in the commits. This is more obvious
> from the web interface, but you can see them with hg by giving “hg log”
> the -v option. hg follows the convention where the first line of the
> commit message is the short description and the remaining lines are the
> long description. Only the former is displayed by “hg log” by default.
Ah, thanks for the explanation. I didn't have time to look into hg more
deeply and am used to see the complete message with "git log".
Now in this case the summary ("updated for version x.y.z") is pretty
meaningless and it would be better to include a real summary there.
And although still not knowing much about hg, I think it's possible with
it to include real authorship in the "user" part of the commit instead
of just adding the name to the "description" part.
Markus
--
You received this message from the "vim_dev" maillist.
For more information, visit http://www.vim.org/maillist.php
