[LLVMdev] [cfe-dev] Bikeshedding commit message policy - Round 3 - Fight!
hfinkel at anl.gov
Sun Mar 15 09:31:20 PDT 2015
----- Original Message -----
> From: "Renato Golin" <renato.golin at linaro.org>
> To: "Hal Finkel" <hfinkel at anl.gov>
> Cc: "LLVM Dev" <llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu>, "Clang Dev" <cfe-dev at cs.uiuc.edu>
> Sent: Sunday, March 15, 2015 10:48:37 AM
> Subject: Re: [cfe-dev] Bikeshedding commit message policy - Round 3 - Fight!
> On 15 March 2015 at 15:06, Hal Finkel <hfinkel at anl.gov> wrote:
> > I used to use CSE:, but have now switched to using [CSE] because
> > that seems to be the prevailing convention (and is somewhat more
> > visually distinctive). I think it makes sense to codify that
> > convention, but not to require them. Sometimes, there is nothing
> > appropriate to use. Sometimes, the first or second word of the
> > commit message is naturally the same as what the title tag would
> > be, and so including the title tag seems redundant.
> I agree with you that [CSE] is the most visually striking, but I
> wonder how much do we want to code when to use them.
I don't want to code when to use them. But it makes sense to say, "If you want to include a title tag, do it like this...".
> There will
> be arguments to all sides, and I think this is not a topic important
> enough for us to make it official.
> See how the exclamation mark became self important on the attribution
> and you'll see what I mean. I think common sense will always prevail
> if we don't try to push too many standards.
I think this is different for a number of reasons.
Assistant Computational Scientist
Leadership Computing Facility
Argonne National Laboratory
More information about the llvm-dev