Date: Mon, 2 Nov 2015 14:24:39 -0800 From: Juli Mallett <juli@clockworksquid.com> To: Randall Stewart <rrs@freebsd.org> Cc: src-committers@freebsd.org, svn-src-all@freebsd.org, svn-src-head@freebsd.org Subject: Re: svn commit: r290276 - head/sys/net Message-ID: <CACVs6=8Ui4h1sBv%2B0XJkKOFNkG05%2BwOZvbs3YZG_fXuVqNrTzg@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <201511022121.tA2LL1wG061420@repo.freebsd.org> References: <201511022121.tA2LL1wG061420@repo.freebsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, Nov 2, 2015 at 1:21 PM, Randall Stewart <rrs@freebsd.org> wrote: > Author: rrs > Date: Mon Nov 2 21:21:00 2015 > New Revision: 290276 > URL: https://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/base/290276 > > Log: > Fix three flowtable bugs, a) one lookup issue, b) a two cleaner issue. > This commit message is not helpful, but the review is; it seems like the summary there might have been better for the commit message than naming the number of bugs. Should we assume the three hunks each fix a bug, or what? What if there were four hunks, or two? That kind of ambiguity and obscurity is especially confusing as time passes.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CACVs6=8Ui4h1sBv%2B0XJkKOFNkG05%2BwOZvbs3YZG_fXuVqNrTzg>