Re: Commit subject line - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Bruce Momjian
Subject Re: Commit subject line
Date
Msg-id 20130506171238.GF26481@momjian.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Commit subject line  (Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net>)
Responses Re: Commit subject line  (Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnakangas@vmware.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Mon, May  6, 2013 at 06:41:53PM +0200, Magnus Hagander wrote:
> > In practice, something else must be further truncating it, at about 64 chars
> > by the look of it - see for example
> > <http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/E1UVTFj-00079k-2r@gemulon.postgresql.org>
> 
> Ha. Good point. There's actually a bit of a bug in the code there :)
> What it does is limit the length to 80-length("pgsql: $shortmsg"),
> which is 64. It is supposed to limit it to 80-length("pgsql: ")..
> (Since it substitutes the actual commit message where $shortmsg is
> found).
> 
> That's fixable though :)
> 
> 
> > Re your other point, github at least seems to elide at about 70 chars  - see
> > <https://github.com/postgres/postgres/commit/b42ea7981ce1e7484951a22662937541066d8647>
> > - where Joe used a very long first sentence rather than a show summary line.
> > I don't know if gitweb could be induced to elide after a greater length - I
> > bet it could fairly easily. There does seem to be lots of spare screen real
> > estate on the commit summary and history pages, which I think is where this
> > occurs.
> 
> Possibly. I can never find my way around that one though, and making
> any modifications also has us ending up maintaining what's basically a
> fork - unless there's always a config argument for it somewhere.

So what should our goal length be?

--  Bruce Momjian  <bruce@momjian.us>        http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB
http://enterprisedb.com
 + It's impossible for everything to be true. +



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: pg_dump --snapshot
Next
From: Josh Berkus
Date:
Subject: Re: pg_dump versus materialized views