You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@subversion.apache.org by Daniel Shahaf <da...@elego.de> on 2013/08/04 08:32:22 UTC
Log messages Re: svn commit: r1505729 -
/subversion/branches/fsfs-improvements/subversion/libsvn_fs_fs/cache
d_data.c
stefan2@apache.org wrote on Mon, Jul 22, 2013 at 16:49:25 -0000:
> Author: stefan2
> Date: Mon Jul 22 16:49:24 2013
> New Revision: 1505729
>
> URL: http://svn.apache.org/r1505729
> Log:
> On the fsfs-improvements branch: Rename a debug function.
>
> * subversion/libsvn_fs_fs/cached_data.c
> (dgb__log_access): rename to ...
> (dbg_log_access): ... this one
That's a classic example of a log message that leaves me "Huh?"-ed: it
says nothing more than the unidiff says. "Fix a typo in the function
name" would have been easier to understand.
This one is a trivial patch, but the point of "Describe the why, not the
what" applies to larger, less-trivial patches too. (And that's why
I made it)
Re: Log messages Re: svn commit: r1505729 - /subversion/branches/fsfs-improvements/subversion/libsvn_fs_fs/cache
d_data.c
Posted by Stefan Fuhrmann <st...@wandisco.com>.
On Sun, Aug 4, 2013 at 8:32 AM, Daniel Shahaf <da...@elego.de> wrote:
> stefan2@apache.org wrote on Mon, Jul 22, 2013 at 16:49:25 -0000:
> > Author: stefan2
> > Date: Mon Jul 22 16:49:24 2013
> > New Revision: 1505729
> >
> > URL: http://svn.apache.org/r1505729
> > Log:
> > On the fsfs-improvements branch: Rename a debug function.
> >
> > * subversion/libsvn_fs_fs/cached_data.c
> > (dgb__log_access): rename to ...
> > (dbg_log_access): ... this one
>
> That's a classic example of a log message that leaves me "Huh?"-ed: it
> says nothing more than the unidiff says. "Fix a typo in the function
> name" would have been easier to understand.
>
Agreed and changed.
> This one is a trivial patch, but the point of "Describe the why, not the
> what" applies to larger, less-trivial patches too. (And that's why
> I made it)
>
I agree with the general goal. Changes that don't impact functionality,
however, often could be summarized as "shuffle code around" and I
find it hard to express the rationale behind those. Of course, there is
a "why" behind them but that can usually be paraphrased as "because
it's just better / nicer that way". On example:
r1506344
On the fsfs-improvements branch: refactor some ID allocation code
into shared functions.
-- Stefan^2,
Re: Log messages Re: svn commit: r1505729 - /subversion/branches/fsfs-improvements/subversion/libsvn_fs_fs/cache
d_data.c
Posted by Stefan Fuhrmann <st...@wandisco.com>.
On Sun, Aug 4, 2013 at 8:32 AM, Daniel Shahaf <da...@elego.de> wrote:
> stefan2@apache.org wrote on Mon, Jul 22, 2013 at 16:49:25 -0000:
> > Author: stefan2
> > Date: Mon Jul 22 16:49:24 2013
> > New Revision: 1505729
> >
> > URL: http://svn.apache.org/r1505729
> > Log:
> > On the fsfs-improvements branch: Rename a debug function.
> >
> > * subversion/libsvn_fs_fs/cached_data.c
> > (dgb__log_access): rename to ...
> > (dbg_log_access): ... this one
>
> That's a classic example of a log message that leaves me "Huh?"-ed: it
> says nothing more than the unidiff says. "Fix a typo in the function
> name" would have been easier to understand.
>
Agreed and changed.
> This one is a trivial patch, but the point of "Describe the why, not the
> what" applies to larger, less-trivial patches too. (And that's why
> I made it)
>
I agree with the general goal. Changes that don't impact functionality,
however, often could be summarized as "shuffle code around" and I
find it hard to express the rationale behind those. Of course, there is
a "why" behind them but that can usually be paraphrased as "because
it's just better / nicer that way". On example:
r1506344
On the fsfs-improvements branch: refactor some ID allocation code
into shared functions.
-- Stefan^2,