From: | "Simon 'corecode' Schubert" <corecode@xxxxxxxxxxxx> |
Date: | Sun, 07 Dec 2008 06:28:53 -0700 |
Peter Avalos wrote: > On Wed, Dec 03, 2008 at 02:32:32PM +0100, Matthias Schmidt wrote: >> He, >> >> * Aggelos Economopoulos wrote: >>> Why do we need all this stuff in the message Subject? The "DragonFly-" >>> part is essentially wasted space (gee, like I need to be reminded which >>> folder I'm reading), space that could be used for something useful. >> Completely agree with Aggelos. What was wrong with the >> master <files> <commit id> line? >> >> Especially the string generated by git-describe is IMO a waste of space. What >> is so special if one can see that we are n commits ahead of 2.1.1 ? > > I agree with this. To go even further, why not have the subject > actually say wihat the commit is? A commit message should be > structured with the first line acting as a subject, so why not put that > in the subject of the email? That way we can actually see what the > commit does, rather than numbers and letters that aren't really telling > me whether I should read that email or not. I like this. How about this: branch: Commit summary line (id) and maybe drop id alltogether. cheers simon
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature