Re: Proposals for commit log policy

[Alexander Amelkin <a.amelkin@yadro.com>]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1790 bytes --]


22.08.2018 18:01, Gunnar Mills wrote:
> Hi Alexander,
>
> On 8/21/2018 7:29 AM, Alexander Amelkin wrote:
>> Thankfully, for linux-obmc version bumps Patrick Williams and Joel Stanley do a great job by including the 'git shortlog' output. Unfortunately, not everyone is following this rule for bumps.
> The autobump tool is here: https://github.com/openbmc/openbmc-tools/blob/master/infra/autobump.pl
> Could you enhance to have the ‘git shortlog’ in the commit message?
Thanks for pointing me to it. I will enhance.

>> Now for item 1, it would be great if we could have a mandatory "End-user-impact" line/section, like these added to the following real commits:
>>
> I really oppose another field/section in each commit. We already have a "tested" field. What happens when someone else wants a field for what systems this commit effects? This might be a bad example but hopefully, you see my point. :)
I see your point, but I hope you feel my pain too. ;)
Technical description for developers is great... for developers. But is totally useless for end users.
What does an admin have to do with all those framework-related commits or dbus optimizations?
They want to know what has changed for them in the new release. And extracting that info from commit logs as they are now is painful and takes at least a leading software engineer. In my experience it takes about 3-4 days to "compile" the current commit logs between releases. That is, read them, comprehend them, ditch pure technical commit messages, translate commit messages that actually change the user experience from programmer's language to admin's language, and as a result of all that produce a document useful for admin end users. IMO, that's a waste of time and a very boring activity.

Alexander.


[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 819 bytes --]