Re: Topic descriptions
- From
- Andy Parkins <andyparkins@gmail.com>
- Date
- Dec 7, 2006, 08:37 UTC
- Message-ID
- <200612070837.16412.andyparkins@gmail.com>
- In-Reply-To
- <7v4ps8y7un.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net>
On Wednesday 2006, December 06 22:31, Junio C Hamano wrote:
Show 5 quoted lines
> I am unlikely to use such a thing for the "What's in" message, > though. The part that talks about "what the current status is" > is much easier to write when I need to talk about "the current"; > otherwise I'd be forced to remember to think if I need to update > the information, every time I touch topic branches.
It wasn't so much the what's current - as you say that would be fairly ridiculous as it's so fluid. It was more a description of the topic. I've got tonnes of branches where I have quickly thought of an idea and started work on it, only to get bored and move on. Describing a topic in such a short space as "ap/short-name" is hard.
The actual place it's stored isn't really relevant, more that I could see a use for it. If it's going in the config I suppose all it needs is a magic "and so it shall be" hand wave. It doesn't require any new code does it?
Andy
-- Dr Andrew Parkins, M Eng (Hons), AMIEE