[cfe-dev] [LLVMdev] RFC: put commit messages in *-commits subject lines?

[David Blaikie]

On Sat, Jan 26, 2013 at 6:22 AM, Tobias Grosser <tobias at grosser.es> wrote:
> On 01/26/2013 01:41 AM, Eli Bendersky wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 4:37 PM, David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 4:28 PM, Eli Bendersky <eliben at google.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 4:07 PM, Daniel Dunbar <daniel at zuster.org>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 4:00 PM, Tobias Grosser <tobias at grosser.es>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 01/26/2013 12:15 AM, Daniel Dunbar wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Ok, this is done and seems to work.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> As far as Chris's request for getting "key directory" paths into the
>>>>>>> commit message, I thought about working on it, but in the end I'm not
>>>>>>> sure why we shouldn't just encourage people to self-tag their leading
>>>>>>> commit line with some sort of standard key ([MC], [Target/Mips],
>>>>>>> whatever).
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Very nice.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> While at that, who can get rid of the [llvm],[cfe-commits], ...
>>>>>> prefixes?
>>>>>> I remember we agreed they just cost screen real estate.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Careful here, these may be used to set up filters in mail clients, and
>>>> an alternative has to be provided.
>>>
>>>
>>> Agreed.
>>>
>>>> For instance, I have a filter that sends all [compiler-rt] related
>>>> mail to its own folder, which is quite important for me.
>>>
>>>
>>> the [compiler-rt] prefix is for the specific repository, rather than
>>> the mailing list - that would remain (it's part of the svn mail
>>> sending process), but the mailing list prefix is a property of the
>>> mailing list software overall, which is what's going to (potentially)
>>> be removed.
>>>
>>
>> OK, I see.
>>
>>> That being said, even though I (& probably most gmail users) have
>>> mailing list rules setup based on list headers rather than subject
>>> prefixes, like you, I wouldn't be sure that everyone has this setup or
>>> that it's convenient for everyone to do so.
>>>
>>> I'd like this change, I'm just not sure how to evaluate whether it's
>>> correct (short of changing it seeing how many people complain/how many
>>> of them cannot be helped/fixed)
>>
>>
>> I guess that the need can be summarized to:
>>
>> - If email comes from separate email addresses (or "to" separate
>> addresses), further specification in the subject is superfluous and
>> can be nuked.
>> - If email is otherwise indistinguishable but comes from different
>> sub-projects, some specification in the subject has to be retained to
>> allow effective mailbox management.
>>
>> What am I missing?
>
>
> I don't see anything missing.
>
> I asked to remove the list name from the subject, as it is already provided
> in the "List-Id" header of all mailing list emails and is consequently
> redundant. The different svn sub-projects are useful and I don't think we
> should remove this information.
>
> Chris replied to that request earlier (15. Nov):
>
>
>> I agree that the list name is redundant and should be dropped, but
>> the revision number is compact and very useful...
>>
>> -Chris
>
> If we agreed to perform this change and we found the person who can change
> it, we can probably give a heads-up a couple of days before to see if
> anybody will have major issues.

SGTM - thanks for the recap/quotation. (but, yes, I'm not the person
who can change that - hopefully Tanya or one of the other admins will
speak up with details)