From owner-svn-src-head@freebsd.org Tue Apr 25 20:10:05 2017 Return-Path: Delivered-To: svn-src-head@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9D68ED504E1; Tue, 25 Apr 2017 20:10:05 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from freebsd@pdx.rh.CN85.dnsmgr.net) Received: from pdx.rh.CN85.dnsmgr.net (br1.CN84in.dnsmgr.net [69.59.192.140]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 57CE8A78; Tue, 25 Apr 2017 20:10:04 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from freebsd@pdx.rh.CN85.dnsmgr.net) Received: from pdx.rh.CN85.dnsmgr.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pdx.rh.CN85.dnsmgr.net (8.13.3/8.13.3) with ESMTP id v3PKA1Mo063113; Tue, 25 Apr 2017 13:10:01 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from freebsd@pdx.rh.CN85.dnsmgr.net) Received: (from freebsd@localhost) by pdx.rh.CN85.dnsmgr.net (8.13.3/8.13.3/Submit) id v3PKA0ba063109; Tue, 25 Apr 2017 13:10:00 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from freebsd) From: "Rodney W. Grimes" Message-Id: <201704252010.v3PKA0ba063109@pdx.rh.CN85.dnsmgr.net> Subject: Re: svn commit: r317409 - head/contrib/tcpdump In-Reply-To: To: Benjamin Kaduk Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2017 13:10:00 -0700 (PDT) CC: rgrimes@freebsd.org, Gleb Smirnoff , "svn-src-head@freebsd.org" , "svn-src-all@freebsd.org" , "src-committers@freebsd.org" Reply-To: rgrimes@freebsd.org X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL121h (25)] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-BeenThere: svn-src-head@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: SVN commit messages for the src tree for head/-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2017 20:10:05 -0000 > On Tue, Apr 25, 2017 at 2:07 PM, Rodney W. Grimes < > freebsd@pdx.rh.cn85.dnsmgr.net> wrote: > > > [ Charset UTF-8 unsupported, converting... ] > > > > > > On the contrary, a git SHA1 seems like an eminently stable and unique > > > search parameter! > > > I agree that a commit log should inline some summary of the change as > > well > > > as provide a > > > link to the external source, but I am not worried that a future reader > > will > > > be unable to find > > > the referenced commit. > > > > There is no administrative policy in place that says github users shall > > maintain there history. > > > > > That is correct. Nor should there be! > > (However, even if they change their history, the direct link to a commit > will still work, > due to the way the github implementation works -- you have to delete and > recreate > a repository in order to fully expunge a commit.) > > I don't expect the previous parenthetical to provide any persuasive value, > of course, > as you have to know where to look before it's useful. But, right now there > are some > 300-odd forks of tcpdump on github, no doubt including Gleb. If > the-tcpdump-group > goes away, there's a lot of backups, not just in github forks but also the > local clones > of people using github. Do you really think that the collapse of such a > prominent > project would leave an unarchived void? I don't understand what scenario > you're trying > to protect against, basically. This is the first time I have seen a raw git1 sha used in the body of the commit message, at best it should be in a Obtained From: Are there other commits that use a raw git sha1 as the explination for the commit, with or without supporting text? > > I had too many indirections to find this change on github: > > commitlog -> google -> wrong article that references this sha1 -> actual > > commit > > > > I re-iterate lets NOT start to use git hashes in our commit messages. > > > > I'm sorry, but I must continue to oppose this sentiment. I would prefer a And so we stand opposed. > full > (github or otherwise) URL including the commit hash to just a bare commit > hash, > but find either acceptable and adequate for the purpose. (FWIW, the > correct commit > was the top google hit for me.) > > I hope we are in agreement that commit messages ought to still include some > description of what change is being brought in, in addition to the > hash/link, though. Commit messages should stand complete and alone, without need to refernce outside material to understand what was changed and why it was changed. Again, at best Obtained From: should of been a usable url. -- Rod Grimes rgrimes@freebsd.org