On Mon, Aug 17, 2020 at 2:37 PM Chris Angelico <ros...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Yes. I was hoping for "we should rewrite that commit", and would have > been content with "we won't rewrite it, but we don't want that > repeated". But the SC said that it is absolutely fine to write commit > messages like that. > While I'm also not entirely content with the outcome (specifically that the commit message would have been left as-is, even if it was easy to edit post-merge) and would have liked to see a similar statement along the lines of the above, I don't consider the current statement by the SC to be saying that it's "absolutely fine" to write similar commit messages in the future. Instead, I interpret it as the SC collectively not being strongly against the commit message in question enough to make an amendment; e.g. they don't consider it egregious enough to take direct action or publicly condemn it, and possibly that doing so would not result in a net benefit to the Python development community. This interpretation may require a bit of reading between the lines because there was no explicit mention by the SC of the commit message being problematic. However, if they considered it to be perfectly fine and having no issues at all, I think it would have been said outright, and this issue would have ended a long time ago instead of them addressing it several times. Going forward, I think the drama from this situation alone will cause us core developers to more carefully assess commit messages before going forward with merging PRs to ensure they focus on the changes being made. When I find the spare cycles to do so, I'm also hoping that I can make a minor addition to the "Making Good Commits" section of the devguide <https://devguide.python.org/pullrequest/#making-good-commits>, to guide future commit messages towards focusing on a technical summary of the changes made and avoiding unrelated commentary. In the meantime, I don't think there's anything productive we can gain from further discussion of this particular commit message. At the end of the day, I suspect it will become buried in the git history and forgotten about since it was associated with a minor change. If anything, further threads about it will just end up bringing more attention to the message than it would have otherwise received. Instead of exhausting more cycles on this, I'd just like to move past this issue and go back to what I actually care about - contributing to Python. -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
