Ramkumar Ramachandra wrote: > I'm trying to > "effectively port the inverse of the changes made by d3f4628e in > revert.c to sequencer.c" -- would you still like to see a git-revert > style commit message? Don't you think it'll be misleading? My main complaint is that the subject line (and then the body) didn't tell me what effect the patch would have in a self-contained way. I don't think a git-revert style commit message would be misleading. Couldn't you avoid confusing people by providing the relevant information directly? "This commit was not made with 'git revert', since there has been too much code reorganization in the meantime; instead, I applied the inverse of the changes made by d3f4628e by hand. This patch also tweaks the test added in that commit instead of removing it." > Sorry about the shoddy commit messages though: I'm polishing the > series now that I'm convinced that it's heading in the right > direction. Hopefully, I'll have more to show soon. Thanks. I'll try not to be distracted and to just focus on the code for the next round. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html