Re: A little report on informal commit tag usage - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: A little report on informal commit tag usage
Date
Msg-id 8501.1563167531@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to A little report on informal commit tag usage  (Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: A little report on informal commit tag usage  (Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@gmail.com> writes:
> Here are the tags that people have used in the past year, in commit messages:

>  763     Author
>    9     Authors
>  144     Backpatch-through
>   55     Backpatch
>   14     Bug
>   14     Co-authored-by
>   27     Diagnosed-By
> 1593     Discussion
>   42     Doc
>  284     Reported-By
>    5     Review
>    8     Reviewed by
>  456     Reviewed-By
>    7     Security
>    9     Tested-By

One small comment on that --- I'm not sure what you meant to count
in respect to the "Doc" item, but I believe there's a fairly widespread
convention to write "doc:" or some variant in the initial summary line
of commits that touch only documentation.  The point here is to let
release-note writers quickly ignore such commits, since we never list
them as release note items.  Bruce and I, being the usual suspects for
release-note writing, are pretty religious about this but other people
do it too.  I see a lot more than 42 such commit messages in the past
year, so not sure what you were counting?

Anyway, that's not a "tag" in the sense I understand you to be using
(otherwise the entries would look something like "Doc: yes" and be at
the end, which is unhelpful for the purpose).  But it's a related sort
of commit-message convention.

            regards, tom lane



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Fabien COELHO
Date:
Subject: Re: refactoring - share str2*int64 functions
Next
From: Thomas Munro
Date:
Subject: Re: XLogRecGetFullXid()