Hi Katherine, Katherine Cox-Buday <cox.katherin...@gmail.com> writes:
> On 9/5/23 10:01 AM, Simon Tournier wrote: > >> Well, somehow, I consider the commit message format similarly as coding >> style. We can discuss which one is better than the other when at the >> end it only reflects some artificial preferences and for the sake of any >> project one needs to be arbitrarily picked. Why not ChangeLog? > > The distinction I draw is that I can usually run a linter against a > coding style. > > I don't care very much what the standard for commit messages is other > than if it has an expectation of structure, I be able to run a tool to > tell me if it's wrong. > > In other words, the overhead isn't "I don't like this standard", it's > "I can't find a way to reliably adhere to the standard". 'git log' should provide ample examples. The format is not strict, and it doesn't matter overly as long as it conveys a summary of the changes accurately; it is meant for us humans. The format is described summarily in the GNU Standards document; to read it, you can run: guix shell standards info-reader -- info '(standards) ChangeLog' -- Thanks, Maxim
