BUG Commit Message
idra at samba.org
Fri Jul 12 07:22:53 MDT 2013
On Fri, 2013-07-12 at 13:25 +0200, Andreas Schneider wrote:
> On Friday 12 July 2013 13:09:30 Stefan Metzmacher wrote:
> > Hi Andreas,
> > > could we try to use the same scheme in the commit message for fixing bugs?
> > >
> > > BUG XXXX: Short comment
> > I think the but number is not the most important thing to know about a
> > commit.
> > e.g.
> > BUG 9994: Do not delete an existing valid credential cache.
> > says nothing without looking at bugzilla or the diff.
> > I think it's much more important to begin the line with the subsystem
> > of the change (that's what I typically use and it's also what the linux
> > kernel seems to use).
> > It's nice to have a bug number as additional information in the first line,
> > but I'm not sure I like it to be the first thing I notice.
> > I typically use something like this:
> > s3:librpc: add support for PFC_FLAG_OBJECT_UUID when parsing packets
> > (bug #9382)
> I would also be fine with:
> smbd: Fix a 100% loop at shutdown time
> In the destructor of fsp->aio_requests we put another request into
> fsp->aio_requests. Don't overwrite that with TALLOC_FREE.
> BUG #12345
> Signed-off-by: Volker Lendecke <vl at samba.org>
> Reviewed-by: Jeremy Allison <jra at samba.org>
> So that it comes after the long description. I would prefer upper case cause
> then it is easier to search for. A text could say: Fix a bug in foo.
In the FreeIPA project I often used the whole bug URL, so you can click
right away from the commit message, so I would propose:
just above the signed-off lines
More information about the samba-technical