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 7CF78139694 for ; Wed, 26 Jul 2017 13:41:50 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 28653E0D88; Wed, 26 Jul 2017 13:41:42 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (dev.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 B747AE0D4E for ; Wed, 26 Jul 2017 13:41:36 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [192.168.123.52] (unknown [50.120.197.130]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: grknight) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 5B446341751 for ; Wed, 26 Jul 2017 13:41:35 +0000 (UTC) Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC pre-GLEP] Gentoo Git Workflow To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org References: <1500969906.1206.1.camel@gentoo.org> From: Brian Evans Message-ID: Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2017 09:41:21 -0400 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.2.1 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 In-Reply-To: <1500969906.1206.1.camel@gentoo.org> Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="skkqFdklpAFcvIom8GxBPvB172qa3IGAw" X-Archives-Salt: 2722c9cf-10c3-4973-9073-a217a0dc74a4 X-Archives-Hash: 3432b660fe2b5cd55c171ba5bdc2b437 This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156) --skkqFdklpAFcvIom8GxBPvB172qa3IGAw Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="IlwWNMW9p9nS2Qg558SiGwbw211hdjK9m"; protected-headers="v1" From: Brian Evans To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Message-ID: Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC pre-GLEP] Gentoo Git Workflow References: <1500969906.1206.1.camel@gentoo.org> In-Reply-To: <1500969906.1206.1.camel@gentoo.org> --IlwWNMW9p9nS2Qg558SiGwbw211hdjK9m Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 7/25/2017 4:05 AM, Micha=C5=82 G=C3=B3rny wrote: > Hi, everyone. >=20 > There have been multiple attempts at grasping this but none so far > resulted in something official and indisputable. At the same time, we > end having to point our users at semi-official guides which change > in unpredictable ways. >=20 > Here's the current draft: > https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/User:MGorny/GLEP:Git >=20 > The basic idea is that the GLEP provides basic guidelines for using git= , > and then we write a proper manual on top of it (right now, all the page= s > about it end up as a mix of requirements and a partial git manual). >=20 > What do you think about it? Is there anything else that needs being > covered? >=20 > Copy of the markup for inline comments follows. [cut] > =3D=3D=3DCommit messages=3D=3D=3D > A standard git commit message consists of three parts, in order: a > summary line, an optional body and an optional set of tags. The parts > are separated by a single empty line. >=20 [cut] > The tag part is included in the full commit log as an extension to the > body. It consists of one or more lines consisting of key, followed by a= > colon and a space, followed by value. Git does not enforce any > standardization of the keys, and the tag format is ''not'' meant for > machine processing. >=20 > A few tags of common use are: > * user-related tags: > ** Acked-by: Full Name =E2=80=94 commit = approved > by another person (usually without detailed review), > ** Reported-by: Full Name , > ** Reviewed-by: Full Name =E2=80=94 usua= lly > indicates full review, > ** Signed-off-by: Full Name =E2=80=94 DC= O > approval (not used in Gentoo right now), > ** Suggested-by: Full Name ,=20 > ** Tested-by: Full Name . > * commit-related tags: > ** Fixes: commit-id (commit message) =E2=80=94 to indicate f= ixing a > previous commit, > ** Reverts: commit-id (commit message) =E2=80=94 to indicate= > reverting a previous commit, > * bug tracker-related tags: > ** Bug: https://bugs.gentoo.org/NNNNNN; =E2= =80=94 to > reference a bug, > ** Closes: https://github.com/gentoo/gentoo/pull/NNNN ki>; =E2=80=94 to automatically close a GitHub pull request, > ** Fixes: https://bugs.gentoo.org/NNNNNN; =E2= =80=94 > to indicate a fixed bug, > * package manager tags: > ** Package-Manager: =E2=80=A6 =E2=80=94 used by repoman to i= ndicate Portage > version, > ** RepoMan-Options: =E2=80=A6 =E2=80=94 used by repoman to i= ndicate repoman > options. >=20 > The bug tracker-related tags can be used to extend the body message. > However, they should be skipped if the bug number is already provided i= n > the summary and there is no explicit body. >=20 My concern on these tags is that some evangelist will come along and demand that they always be included with every commit since they exist in a GLEP. They add very little value, IMO, and I doubt they will ever be parsed or ever read. I would object less if the committing tool, i.e. repoman, would provide easy switches for common cases for uniformity. I foresee more work on my part to remember such lines and would have to look up the "current syntax" as it goes through debate many times over as it already has. (Both in the past and in this thread again). Brian --IlwWNMW9p9nS2Qg558SiGwbw211hdjK9m-- --skkqFdklpAFcvIom8GxBPvB172qa3IGAw Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.17 (MingW32) iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJZeJwMAAoJENH3ge/59KO28GAP/i+IpNzDA0MbhpDYD+lLFTzk yHTv8fvy6JdkXSjFKqwRUyWbQCb1zHtqR0Pkk78M73WxM6FgezGkcW724e0pYTV+ BWkMjN+p26ZexSS0BDpFqHl68bseoOwDg64VdVVWtnusCOFUvTRDjGcN4qTPFtED juG3dPqNs8UOFygOt9W5JMPwFUFgOARtylFjL160V/hNw9UydjxHjTWwmrJ0+jAT h3FihD9f7b8MVjtvmqtZAloLp90E85wdO1vdQOXOFAh52tSE0VJ1qm3Xoy/tPjIU ncwhtuyTVtDboZO4jL+Ex8PXEDl2gaV1nLu/bY+GWv3JHaFBSs8XH7zg3RKsUJby u1GiIzrsxWZcOZ7pwtFKqtXI2S280O+1razZM466QWnOTUJ73IfsnLibmubJsJrE NMUGRyTdlDzD/s8YjJowgjhGhaCyalaRpxveLgHAU/+XaXlg9LeT2B6Q/t5cMTwR hycKEVknvwORIeBtHecSS76nnmyUqflFiZgZ2i1Jw0epsSE/GVzU4zwLCrrxKBE5 RY3QwoSR/0MKu+m6aT32X3aE2DMR/g3PTVZ0gVVWRvfewadqrKVLqKiUlkoBMoN0 7TLH/Bmiiu4s0HiM4ZD9VSCK3EurlJSShn5Zi123E179uTLQZR6AZwGc0h+AgDcq 0UM6Vw0LY33dZiliZSJW =0K9Z -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --skkqFdklpAFcvIom8GxBPvB172qa3IGAw--