[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: git history tracking across renames (and emacs support) (Was: The na

From: Paul Eggert
Subject: Re: git history tracking across renames (and emacs support) (Was: The name gnus-cloud.el)
Date: Mon, 8 Jan 2018 23:27:10 -0800
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.5.0

Richard Stallman wrote:
   > If it's important enough to
   > mention the change from extern to static in the commit message, the
   > current guidelines would seem to imply that it's important enough to
   > mention why the change was made in code comments.

Here's what the standard actually says:

       If you think that a change
     calls for explanation, you're probably right.  Please do explain
     it---but please put the full explanation in comments in the code,
     where people will see it whenever they see the code.

So you're criticizing a practice which is NOT our standard.

I didn't think that particular change required any description or explanation. That is, the change and its intent was obvious from the diff, and I put something into the commit message (aka ChangeLog entry) only because the coding standards required it. If commit messages are not required for trivial changes, it'd be helpful for the coding standards to say so, as this will save us some unnecessary work.

reply via email to

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