On Feb 16, 2015, at 8:11, John Baldwin <j...@freebsd.org> wrote: > On Friday, February 13, 2015 09:36:17 PM Garrett Cooper wrote: >> Author: ngie >> Date: Fri Feb 13 21:36:16 2015 >> New Revision: 278718 >> URL: https://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/base/278718 >> >> Log: >> MFC r278717: >> >> r278717: >> >> MFC r277678: >> >> r277678: >> >> Add MK_CCD knob for building and installing ccd(4), ccdconfig, etc >> >> Sponsored by: EMC / Isilon Storage Division > > I believe you are supposed to merge from HEAD to 9, not from 10 to 9.
I try to do that where it makes sense. Merging and redoing some of the work I did going from head to head-1 increases the likelihood of error (especially with all of the build system refactoring that took place in the past year). > But also, I find these log messages quite noisy. I much prefer just: > > MFC <head rev>: > <original log message> > > Where the <original log message> is not extra-indented but is formatted > similar to a normal commit. I was doing that [subjectively] for readability, but that’s ok, I’ll take out the extra indentation. > On a more general note, if I'm merging a change with several followup fixes, > I > 1) always merge the entire batch of changes so as not to leave stable/ in a > broken state (most folks also do this), and 2) I don't cut and paste all N > logs verbatim. This tends to be very hard to read. Instead, I do 'MFC <list > of head revs>' and then use a brief summary of the change being merged. > Often > this means using the log message of the first change (which introduces the > new > feature and explains it) but omitting short descriptions of specific bugs > fixed (which aren't very useful to someone reading the stable log message as > the commit in question is introducing the needed feature in its fixed state.) > > This does require a bit more effort editorial wise, but I think it results in > commit logs for stable that are more readable. Sure. I wish that there was a set format for this. All of this is scripted for me, so merging is a trivial task — it’s just a bit confusing when I have 5 different people telling me my MFC message is wrong, but oh well… it’s just a script. Lol. Thanks :),
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
