[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Your commit 7409a79

From: Stephen Leake
Subject: Re: Your commit 7409a79
Date: Mon, 08 Dec 2014 17:38:39 -0600
User-agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.3.94 (windows-nt)

Eli Zaretskii <address@hidden> writes:

>> From: "Stephen J. Turnbull" <address@hidden>
>> Date: Mon, 08 Dec 2014 11:28:48 +0900
>> Cc: Stephen Leake <address@hidden>, address@hidden
>> I would do the other work that the rename is intended to support on a
>> branch, do the rename, and then a merge commit with a commit message
>> like
>>     Clarify CONTRIBUTE and make it prominently visible.
>>     Step one in a revolutionary program to attract more contributors
>>     to Emacs.
>>     - Move from etc/ to top level for visibility in ls and git-browser.
>>     - Specify format of commit log summaries.
>>     - etc, etc
>> Then the rename commit can be trivial with a simple statement of fact:
> Exactly my thoughts.
>>     Rename etc/CONTRIBUTE to ./CONTRIBUTE.
>> Of course this style of committing and logs would be an insuperable
>> barrier to contribution if it were made policy. ;-)
> If people object to having instructions in CONTRIBUTE that might be
> not 100% necessary, I wonder if we can put recommendations in
> CONTRIBUTE without making it a policy that is enforced.  Something
> like "we recommend ...".

We can use "shall" or "must" for requirements, "should" for
recommendations. That's standard NASA practice.

That is _not_ the language used in the Gnu coding standards; that uses
"should" and "please" and other random words. It's not at all clear how
that relates to required/recommended.

-- Stephe

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]