From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: 7rans Subject: Re: commit type Date: Mon, 3 Nov 2008 01:34:39 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: References: <3e8340490811021502p70ab40a1ocdc9fca012769a29@mail.gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: git@vger.kernel.org X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Mon Nov 03 02:36:33 2008 connect(): Connection refused Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1KwoMh-00050W-GM for gcvg-git-2@gmane.org; Mon, 03 Nov 2008 02:36:23 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752881AbYKCBe4 (ORCPT ); Sun, 2 Nov 2008 20:34:56 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1753163AbYKCBe4 (ORCPT ); Sun, 2 Nov 2008 20:34:56 -0500 Received: from main.gmane.org ([80.91.229.2]:33335 "EHLO ciao.gmane.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752878AbYKCBez (ORCPT ); Sun, 2 Nov 2008 20:34:55 -0500 Received: from list by ciao.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1KwoLA-0003q1-Cs for git@vger.kernel.org; Mon, 03 Nov 2008 01:34:48 +0000 Received: from 216.241.118.70.cfl.res.rr.com ([70.118.241.216]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Mon, 03 Nov 2008 01:34:48 +0000 Received: from transfire by 216.241.118.70.cfl.res.rr.com with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Mon, 03 Nov 2008 01:34:48 +0000 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: main.gmane.org User-Agent: Loom/3.14 (http://gmane.org/) X-Loom-IP: 70.118.241.216 (Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.0.3) Gecko/2008092510 Ubuntu/8.04 (hardy) Firefox/3.0.3) Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: bd_ gmail.com> writes: > The problem with this approach is that it begins to dictate a set of > annotations which are considered 'more important' by the git core than > others. By allowing in your 'commit type', it sets a precedent that > git will add random, possibly not backwards compatible metadata > changes just to support the local policies of some subset of git > users. It's far better to provide a generic feature that will cover > all users; and using the commit description, with hooks to enforce > proper format according to local policy, is just that. > > If using the commit description, with hooks to enforce whatever > formatting you prefer, is not sufficient for your needs, then it would > be useful to discuss exactly how this would be deficient, and then > possibly think about adding a /generic/ feature that meets your needs. Except for going so far as to add full-on tagging to commits, I'd don't see how it could be more generic. Perhaps I'm misunderstood. I'm not suggesting any particular set of types, if that's what you think. Just the ability to add one. For example: git commit -m "describe some change" --type anything-at-all So the types *I* would use are 'major', 'minor' and 'bug', but others could use whatever types they'd like. Ie. developers could have their one type policies. And I agree, it would be cool to define hooks to enforce the policy. The problem with adding them to the description is that other tools have no idea about them and so can't not display them when they aren't wanted --a logging tool is a good example. It is also means more complicated scripting is required to do anything with them, not a huge deal, but a pita nonetheless.