Re: [RFC] Commit message format

[Dan Eble]

On Feb 7, 2020, at 10:39, Han-Wen Nienhuys <address@hidden> wrote:
> 
> There are a couple of downsides to this format:
> * The number takes up space in the
>    git log --format=short

upside: the number appears in git log —format=short

> * The number is meaningless without the site that hosts the tracker

exaggerated, but I see your point

>    Link to code review
>    Link to issue
> 
> By embedding the links, we offer something clickable to whomever is
> browsing the commit message.

-1, maybe.  Will the commit messages be rewritten when we migrate to a 
different issue tracker or the provider decides to reorganize the URL paths?  A 
stale link from which I must extract an ID would annoy me more than a bare ID, 
I expect.

(I might have put links in a commit message or two, but please do as I say, not 
as I do.)

Also, I've worked with issue trackers that scan commit messages for IDs in a 
specific format (e.g. "#1234" or "[1234]") and turn them into hyperlinks from 
the ticket to the related commits in a repository view.  It's probably best to 
postpone dictating a citation format until we know the constraints of the tools 
we move to (hoping we do).  We might even be able to configure patterns for 
recognizing our older citations.

> Finally, I want to encourage everyone to write Why something was
> changed rather What. One can deduce what changed by looking at the
> commit message.  It is much harder to fathom Why some change was
> necessary.

+1.  This is good practice for code comments too.  I probably appreciate "why 
it was not done the obvious way" the most.
— 
Dan