Patch revision logs in commit messages?

[Pekka Paalanen]

On Mon, 4 Jul 2016 17:54:39 +0100
Emil Velikov <emil.l.velikov at gmail.com> wrote:

> On 4 July 2016 at 15:45, Quentin Glidic <sardemff7+wayland at sardemff7.net> wrote:
> > On 04/07/2016 16:23, Emil Velikov wrote:  
> >>
> >> Use the documented libweston-$major.so.0.$minor.$patch scheme.
> >>
> >> An (almost) identical one is used by GLIB, GTK{2,3}, QT5, json-glib and
> >> others.
> >>
> >> v2:
> >>  - Use shorter variable names LIBWESTON_{MAJOR,MINOR...}
> >>  - Correctly use -version-info.
> >>  - Drop unneeded @LIBWESTON_VERSION_MAJOR@ additions.
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Emil Velikov <emil.l.velikov at collabora.com>
> >> ---
> >>
> >> XXX:
> >>  - Should we rename libweston{,-0}.pc.in ?
> >>  - Drop the s/LIBWESTON_ABI_VERSION/LIBWESTON_MAJOR/ hunk ?
> >>  - Keep the configure libweston_*_version variables shorter ?
> >>  - Yes, the LT_VERSION_INFO hunk looks a bit nasty, yet this is what GTK
> >> is doing, once you unraver the 2-3 layers of variables. It works as
> >> expected though, and I'd imagine others are doing a similar trick.
> >>
> >> fixup! libweston: use new versioning scheme  
> >
> >
> > Looks good. A bit hard to read but I thing you at least build-tested it. :-)
> >
> > I think you can drop the "v2" part in the commit message, btw.
> >  
> I've noticed that other commits keep their revision history above the
> --- line, and thus is present in git log. So I take that it's a nice
> to have, but here it's just useless ?

Hi,

I would tend to err on too much information in the commit message
than too little, so I don't mind at all having the patch revision
log included. It might even answer some questions for a future git
archeologist.


Thanks,
pq
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 811 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <https://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/wayland-devel/attachments/20160707/9dc8a848/attachment.sig>