From: Eric Wong Date: 2017-02-04T09:05:35+00:00 Subject: [ruby-core:79428] Re: [Ruby trunk Bug#13189] [DOC] Restore class documentation for Struct sto.mar@web.de wrote: > @normal (@Anonymous) > > Regarding commit messages / further explanations: > > I wasn't aware that the complete description would be included > in the commit message; is there a preferred way on > bugs.ruby-lang.org for providing a (suggested) commit message > and additional, more verbose explanations? Yes, I prefer that, at least. Having to go online or even go out-of-band into my mail archives to look for the explanation of change is often inconvenient. Explaining in commit message is is analogous to the inline-cache in YARV to improve locality :) Anyways, it is expected for git.git (and linux.git) for commit messages to be complete enough to justify a change. To the contrary, I dislike GNU ChangeLog entry style used in Ruby ("make change"). GNU-style describes what changed; but what changed should already be obvious from reading a diff. The "why" is not always obvious, and should be explained. For Ruby, I try to remember to do both (why and what) because matz liked GNU-style entries, and nobody complained about my commit messages being too informative :) If you wish (and it would make my life as patch applyer easier :) you may use "git format-patch" to generate the patch with full commit message or use "git request-pull" to format a pull request pointing to any anonymously-accessible git server. I will also try to remember to use --add-author-from option with "git svn" to give you proper credit :x > (On GitHub there is a natural distinction between the > commit message and the PR description, but not for Redmine.) For a single change, I prefer the commit message cover everything. For multiple changes, an overview of the series along with "git request-pull" helps summarize the changes. Unsubscribe: