Hi Jonahtan, On Tue, 31 Oct 2017, Jonathan Nieder wrote: > Johannes Schindelin wrote: > > On Mon, 30 Oct 2017, Jonathan Nieder wrote: > > >> Can this rationale go in the commit messages? > > > > I thought I had done exactly that in 1/3... > > Okay, I'll be more specific. This cover letter includes some > information about the rationale and motivation for the series. That's > great: it makes reading the patches easier. But TBH I'd rather that > it hadn't included that information at all, since if it said "see > patch 1/3 for rationale" then I could save the trouble of reading the > same information twice. Alas, I am the exact opposite. You see, I am seriously short on time, and if the cover letter of a patch series leaves everything about the changes unclear, I throw my laptop out the window (actually, I suppress the urge and just delete the mail thread in my mail reader) and move to the next mail. It sounds a bit stupid to cater to myself in patches *I* submit, but I refuse to believe that there are many people with more time on their hands than myself (last time I tried to research this, it looked as everybody has the same 86,400 seconds per day available, give or take the occasional leap second). > And unfortunately much of the relevant information is not repeated > there. The cover letter mentions: > > - that Visual Studio is a motivating example That was actually on purpose. Personally, I want to read the motivation in the cover letter, and not get distracted by it when reading the commit logs. To make you happy, I added this, though. > - that this is conceptually similar to Unix sockets To make you happy, I added this, too. > - that those do not need to be marked as inheritable, as the process > can simply open the named pipe. No global flags. No problems. I just added "(and therefore no inherited handles need to be closed)" to the last sentence of 1/3's commit message that already mentioned this. > - that this has already seem some testing in Git for Windows (i.e. > analagous information to what a Tested-by footer would say) I mentioned this twice, in 1/3's and in 3/3's commit message. > It is also just more readable than patch 1/3's commit message. That's > to be expected, since it was written later. My second draft of > something is often clearer than the first draft. I took your cue and simply replaced the first paragraph of 1/3's commit message by the first paragraph of the cover letter. Ciao, Dscho
