Hi Hilton,
Hilton Chain <hako@ultrarare.space> writes:
[...]
>> It's not a bad idea, though I'm not sure if I'd want to enforce my
>> personal preference (e.g., {} vs <>). It doesn't overly matter to me,
>> especially now that it became more tedious to review the commit messages
>> with Codeberg. I'll probably spend more time on what ultimately matters
>> more (the diff), and I assume others will too.
>
> If the exact convention in commit messages doesn't matter, I think we should
> say
> so. What's needed in the contribution process should be made clear in the
> documentation, so that most contributions can be considered finished only with
> documented information. This is the eventual state I want to achieve in
> <y7634bde07g.fsf@ultrarare.space>'s thoughts. I think I'll explain it more in
> that thread.
Perhaps we could say we follow the GNU ChangeLog style, with some local
adaptations that make it more convenient for our purposes/the Scheme
language, and detail what are those differences (covered in my previous
message).
--
Thanks,
Maxim
