The <short description of bug> is to describe what was the problem. For
most bugs you cannot (should not) describe how you solved it in just one
line.
I disagree here. In many cases I think it is wrong to simply repeat the bug
title in the commit message of the commit that (partly or wholly) fixes the
bug. Instead the commit message should say what the commit does. That it
fixes a specific bug is just a side-effect, a note.
Sure, it is impossible in many cases to accurately describe everything a
change does in just one line. To provide a good one-line summary is an art
form;) But please do try. Don't just repeat the bug title.
Also (this is also personal preference, and might be just bike-shedding) a
commit message should be in present tense. It should say what the change
*does*. Not what it "did".
And, as it is just one line, avoid any extra punctuation if you want to
cram a meaningful description into it. I personally also don't see the
usefulness in putting the "module" name as a prefix on the commit message.
But I know that many esteemed colleagues disagree.
--tml
Context
Privacy Policy |
Impressum (Legal Info) |
Copyright information: Unless otherwise specified, all text and images
on this website are licensed under the
Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License.
This does not include the source code of LibreOffice, which is
licensed under the Mozilla Public License (
MPLv2).
"LibreOffice" and "The Document Foundation" are
registered trademarks of their corresponding registered owners or are
in actual use as trademarks in one or more countries. Their respective
logos and icons are also subject to international copyright laws. Use
thereof is explained in our
trademark policy.