Re: [PATCH v2 1/1] commit: display advice hints when commit fails

> Emily Shaffer <emilyshaffer@google.com> writes:
> 
> > Hm. I'm surprised to see this feedback come in the form of a local
> > change when making the topic branch, rather than in a reply to the v1
> > patch. What's the reasoning? (Or is this scissors patch intended to be
> > the feedback?)
> 
> You haven't seen a suggestion in the form of counter-proposal?

> 
> > I ask because out of all of us, it seems the Outreachy interns can
> > benefit the most from advice on how and why to write their commit
> > messages - that is, part of the point of an internship is to learn best
> > practices and cultural norms in addition to coding practice. (Plus, I
> > find being asked to rewrite a commit message tends to force me to
> > understand my own change even better than before.)
> 
> It's something Mentors can help doing (I do not necessarily have
> time for that myself), and you're welcome to use the "tenatively
> queued" version as an example.
> 
> > I'll go ahead and look through the changes to the commit message so I
> > can learn what you're looking for too :)
> 
> Nice.
> 
> One thing you missed in your review of the "tentatively queued"
> version is the reversal of the order of presentation.  Instead of
> starting with "I decided to do this" without explanation, give the
> picture of status quo to set the stage, explain what issue exists in
> the current behaviour, and then describe what approach was chosen to
> solve the issue.

> 
> > For me, I don't particularly see why we'd want to be rid of it - it sort
> > of feels like "a picture is worth a thousand words" to include the
> > actual use case in the commit message.
> 
> Output coming from commands and/or options that are used only in a
> bit more advanced workflow and the ones that are rarely seen, I do
> agree that showing example is a good way to illustrate exactly what
> you are talking about.
> 
> On the other hand, for behaviour of basic local commands like "git
> add", "git commit", "git diff", ..., I do not necessarily agree, as
> these should be obvious and clear to all the intended audiences,
> which would be "anybody who has used Git for say more than two
> weeks.