Re: [PATCH v3 2/2] doc: revert: add discussion

From: Phillip Wood <phillip.wood123@gmail.com>
To: Linus Arver <linusa@google.com>,
	Oswald Buddenhagen <oswald.buddenhagen@gmx.de>,
	git@vger.kernel.org
Cc: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/2] doc: revert: add discussion
Date: Fri, 11 Aug 2023 16:08:14 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <b9f8c965-731d-84eb-f60e-fbed418f9ca2@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <owly8raih8ho.fsf@fine.c.googlers.com>

On 10/08/2023 22:50, Linus Arver wrote:
> Oswald Buddenhagen <oswald.buddenhagen@gmx.de> writes:
>> +DISCUSSION
>> +----------
>> +
>> +While git creates a basic commit message automatically, you really
>> +should not leave it at that. In particular, it is _strongly_
>> +recommended to explain why the original commit is being reverted.
>> +Repeatedly reverting reversions yields increasingly unwieldy
>> +commit subjects; latest when you arrive at 'Reapply "Reapply
>> +"<original subject>""' you should get creative.
> 
> The word "latest" here sounds odd. Ditto for "get creative". How about
> the following rewording?
> 
>      While git creates a basic commit message automatically, it is
>      _strongly_ recommended to explain why the original commit is being
>      reverted. In addition, repeatedly reverting the same commit will
>      result in increasingly unwieldy subject lines, for example 'Reapply
>      "Reapply "<original subject>""'. Please consider rewording such
>      subject lines to reflect the reason why the original commit is being
>      reapplied again.

That's a good suggestion, I think having the example will help readers 
understand the issue being described.

Best Wishes

Phillip