Hi Geert, On 2010-10-29, at 05:21, Geert Janssens wrote:
> […] > The commit log message is a bit confusing in the svn context though. The > merge > didn't happen in svn. Instead, svn only sees the summary of several commits > in > the git branch you used to work on this. In this case it's luckily not really > an issue. The branch was called "bug633066" which gives a good hint to what > the commit intended to resolve. But branch names may not always be so helpful. You are absolutely right, basically I never even wanted a Subversion user to be aware that a merge had been done. As far as SVN is concerned the history is linear. I should have checked carefully before committing. Mea culpa! > I'm thinking of ways we can improve this: the first obvious improvement would > be to have a more elaborate log message when merging a development branch > back > to head, one that makes sense in the svn context as well. > > For example in this case the log message could have been: > Bug #633066 - Add a few structuring and translator comments to gnucash- > guide.xml > (git - Merge branch 'bug633066' into HEAD) > > Or something like that. Especially the "Bug #633066" inclusion is very > useful. > This construct is recognized by trac and will result in links to the relevant > bug report in the trac browser. The git part helps git users to see how this > commit was realized. > > Anyway, that is my first idea. I'm open for improvements or simplifications. I think what I should have done is a git merge –no-commit and then edited the commit message to give a good description. I’ll keep this in mind for the future. Thanks for pointing it out! Regards, Yawar
PGP.sig
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ gnucash-devel mailing list gnucash-devel@gnucash.org https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-devel
