From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 40FB6139694 for ; Tue, 25 Jul 2017 11:53:12 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 825721FC05E; Tue, 25 Jul 2017 11:53:02 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (woodpecker.gentoo.org [IPv6:2001:470:ea4a:1:5054:ff:fec7:86e4]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8BC1A1FC03F for ; Tue, 25 Jul 2017 11:53:01 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [10.96.117.34] (public-gprs383514.centertel.pl [37.47.129.91]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: mgorny) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 2D0863416E5; Tue, 25 Jul 2017 11:52:58 +0000 (UTC) Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2017 13:52:54 +0200 User-Agent: K-9 Mail for Android In-Reply-To: References: <1500969906.1206.1.camel@gentoo.org> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC pre-GLEP] Gentoo Git Workflow To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org,Michael Orlitzky From: =?UTF-8?Q?Micha=C5=82_G=C3=B3rny?= Message-ID: <0A428688-D128-4767-A9E5-E0F2D3004B18@gentoo.org> X-Archives-Salt: 096418b1-8566-4ae7-813e-75d50ec74d8c X-Archives-Hash: 4ec5dcff07c5dc6cdf7913d192cf826e Dnia 25 lipca 2017 13:25:38 CEST, Michael Orlitzky napis= a=C5=82(a): >On 07/25/2017 04:05 AM, Micha=C5=82 G=C3=B3rny wrote: >>=20 >> Here's the current draft: >> https://wiki=2Egentoo=2Eorg/wiki/User:MGorny/GLEP:Git >>=20 > >It's mostly fine, but there are two changes I disagree with: > >> When doing one or more changes that require a revision bump, bump the >> revision in the commit including the first change=2E Split the changes >> into multiple logical commits without further revision bumps =E2=80=94 = since >> they are going to be pushed in a single push, the user will not be >> exposed to interim state=2E > >We shouldn't play games in the repo and hope that everything works out >if we wait to push until just the right time=2E We're not going to run >out >of numbers -- it's simpler and more correct to do a new revision with >each commit=2E I have no clue what you mean=2E I'm just saying that if you push 10 change= s in 10 commits, you don't have to go straight to -r10 in a single push=2E > > >> Gentoo developers are still frequently using Gentoo-Bug tag, >> sometimes followed by Gentoo-Bug-URL=2E Using both simultaneously is >> meaningless (they are redundant), and using the former has no >> advantages over using the classic #nnnnnn form in the summary or the >> body=2E > >There are two main advantages over having the bug number in the >summary=2E >Space is at a premium in the summary, as Tobias pointed out, and the > > Gentoo-Bug: whatever > >format is trivially machine-readable, whereas sticking it somewhere >else >is less so=2E Except that there is no machines using it=2E In all contexts, using full U= RL for machine readability is better as it works with all software out of t= he box=2E > >And just a reminder -- Gokturk worked to get a lot of this stuff into >the devmanual, e=2Eg=2E > > https://devmanual=2Egentoo=2Eorg/ebuild-maintenance/index=2Ehtml > >Some of that is important, like the warning not to use "bug #x" in the >body of the commit message=2E --=20 Best regards, Micha=C5=82 G=C3=B3rny (by phone)