Re: [PATCH v2 0/3] Feature: New Variable git-p4.p4program

From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Date: Nov 16, 2019, 02:40 UTC
Message-ID: <xmqqd0ds5ysq.fsf@gitster-ct.c.googlers.com>
In-Reply-To: <pull.465.v2.git.1573828978.gitgitgadget@gmail.com>

"Ben Keene via GitGitGadget" <gitgitgadget@gmail.com> writes:

Show 6 quoted lines

> Ben Keene (3):
>   Cast byte strings to unicode strings in python3
>   Added general variable git-p4.binary and added a default for windows
>     of 'P4.EXE'
>   Changed the name of the parameter from git-p4.binary to
>     git-p4.p4program

That's rather poor organization. In the larger picture, nobody wants to even know jthat you used to call git-p4.p4program with a different name or what that different name was. They do not even need to know why the new name is an improvement (but you do not even discuss to justify the name change in the proposed log message of 3/3, which is even worse X-<).

When presenting your work to the public, Git lets you pretend to be a perfect human who never made mistake while preparing it and built the series as a logical progression with perfect foresight. That is how "git rebase -i" is useful. Learn to take advantage of that ;-)

As to individual patches, our local (read: project specific) convention around here is to state the are the patch touches (in the case of these patches, "git-p4" is the appropriate area name), colon, and then a one-line summary of what the step is about (the last one is done without initial capitalization). The summary is written with the focus more on why and what than how.

Thanks.