Hi, On Mon, 7 May 2007, Matthieu Moy wrote: > Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@xxxxxx> writes: > > > Just another reason to hate CVS. Because it trained people to do that. If > > it was not for the training by CVS, I would have strongly opposed to the > > introduction of the "-m" switch to commit. It _encourages_ bad commit > > messages. > > Well, this really depends on the use-case, size of commit, ... Okay, so I use "-m" myself sometimes. > I often use a version control system for very low importance stuff. I > don't want to type a 3-lines long message to describe a 2-lines long > change in my ~/.emacs.el for example. IIRC our record is 90+ lines of commit message for a one-line change. > I also work with people using (sorry) svn to work collaboratively, but > they don't even provide a log message: the version control system here > is just a replacement for unison/NFS/whatever other way to have people > edit files from different machines. I positively _hate_ empty commit messages. There is _always_ something to be said about the intent of the change, that has no place in the code. > For sure, in a context where code quality and review is important, -m > "xxx" isn't the way (except if you prefer your shell's line editor to > your actual editor). I also find it very useful for my own pleasure when reviewing some logs. I track config files, small scripts, documents, etc. with Git, and I found myself looking for something in _all_ of them. The commit messages helped. Commit messages, BTW, are somewhat of an artform. You cannot imagine how slow I am writing them, because they should be helpful not only for the reviewer, but also for the casual git-blame user, who wants to find out the rationale of a change. Ciao, Dscho - 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