Felipe Contreras <felipe.contreras@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > On Wed, Feb 15, 2012 at 12:18 AM, Junio C Hamano <gitster@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > And I don't understand why people want the obvious to be explained. Has it ever occurred to you the reason why people ask questions to you is perhaps because something that is obvious to you who wrote the patch is not obvious at all to others? Has it also occurred to you that the majority of people who need to understand the patch during the review and 6 months down the road in "git log" output are not *you*? > Your new point is "you can add a new thing that we did not have, but > it would not result in a good addition if that new thing is > irrelevant", but you already know what is the new thing from the > summary "'git blame -e' tests". It is not a "new point". Jonathan, Peff and I all never said that it is unclear "what" your patch adds. The suggestions for improvement given in this thread were all to explain "why" better. > Everybody seems to assume that a simple commit message = bad. I disagree. If you find *everybody* seems to disagree with you, it would help to consider a slight possibility that you *might* be wrong. And "simple" is not necessarily "sufficient and simple". > ... And I already pointed out the double standards. Sorry, but the absolute uniform standards do not exist, unless you are living in a fantasy land. I expect better from list regulars as new contributors will inevitably learn from their behaviour (we also learn from our past mistakes). -- 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