couchdb-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jason Smith <...@apache.org>
Subject Re: [PROPOSAL] tag our commits
Date Wed, 04 Dec 2013 17:46:05 GMT
I am happy to try it in the spirit of trying things.

I agree with Noah: I'd love if this were documented in a Git workflow
procedure. In particular, which tags should we use, and why.

On Thu, Dec 5, 2013 at 12:40 AM, Benoit Chesneau <bchesneau@gmail.com>wrote:

> On Wed, Dec 4, 2013 at 6:33 PM, Noah Slater <nslater@apache.org> wrote:
>
> > That's why I said "optional". If people want too use "[docs] Add foo
> > docs" then be my guest. But requiring it seems like trouble. (It
> > effectively means we can never accept squashed changes.)
> >
>
> hrmmm, generally you're squashing only related commits so it should work.
> It works in the linux project at least.
>
>
>
> >
> > On 4 December 2013 17:58, Alexander Shorin <kxepal@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > Yea, same tag, but as word (:
> > > --
> > > ,,,^..^,,,
> > >
> > >
> > > On Wed, Dec 4, 2013 at 8:56 PM, Dale Harvey <dale@arandomurl.com>
> wrote:
> > >> "Document foo/bar config option"
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> On 4 December 2013 16:54, Alexander Shorin <kxepal@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >>
> > >>> On other hand when you see commit message:
> > >>>
> > >>> Add foo/bar config option
> > >>>
> > >>> What is your first though? Oh, new config option! But no, that was
> > >>> missed option description in docs. To resolve such collision I may
> tag
> > >>> my commit message:
> > >>>
> > >>> Docs: add foo/bar config option  // now you know what have changed!
> > >>>
> > >>> or imagine something like:
> > >>>
> > >>> Add missed foo/bar/config option description in docs // too long
> > >>>
> > >>> How I could solve this problem?
> > >>>
> > >>> --
> > >>> ,,,^..^,,,
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> On Wed, Dec 4, 2013 at 8:24 PM, Jason Smith <jhs@apache.org>
wrote:
> > >>> > -1
> > >>> >
> > >>> > We do this at Nodejitsu and I find it tedious and unhelpful. It's
a
> > bit
> > >>> of
> > >>> > ceremony with little benefit. For me at least, I never want to
see
> > "only
> > >>> > [foo] commits" I want to see "only commits in subdirectory foo/".
> > >>> Otherwise
> > >>> > I see the commits through `git blame`.
> > >>> >
> > >>> > That's my opinion, but I am comfortable being overruled.
> > >>> >
> > >>> >
> > >>> > On Sun, Oct 27, 2013 at 8:28 PM, Benoit Chesneau <
> > bchesneau@gmail.com
> > >>> >wrote:
> > >>> >
> > >>> >> Hi all,
> > >>> >>
> > >>> >> I would like to propose that we start to tag our commits.
The
> > reasonning
> > >>> >> behind that is to distinct easily the changes concerning 
the doc,
> > the
> > >>> ui
> > >>> >> and the core and filter them immediately and force us to make
a
> > change
> > >>> >> atomic. So I would like to propose that we tag the commit
line
> with
> > >>> >>
> > >>> >> [DOC]
> > >>> >> [UI]
> > >>> >> [CORE]
> > >>> >>
> > >>> >> other ? Another way to distinct the changes would also be
to have
> > all of
> > >>> >> these as subprojects eventually but it may require too much
> changes.
> > >>> >>
> > >>> >> Thoughts?
> > >>> >>
> > >>> >> - benoit
> > >>> >>
> > >>>
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Noah Slater
> > https://twitter.com/nslater
> >
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message