>> Do you find my wording “This issue was detected by using the >> Coccinelle software.” insufficient? > > This is fine for cover letter, not for the commits. I guess that there are more opinions available by other contributors for this aspect. > After your analysis software finds an issue you should manually analyze > what is wrong This view is generally fine. > and document that to the commit message. I tried it in a single paragraph so far (besides the reference for the tool). > This applies to sparse, coccinelle or any other tool. I find that further possibilities can be considered. > Tool-based commit messages are bad for commit history I disagree to this view. > where as clean description gives idea what was done > (if you have to maintain a GIT tree). How do you think about to offer any wording for an alternative which you would find better? > In my opinion tool is doing all the work but the part > that you should do is absent. Really? Regards, Markus
