|
Size: 1380
Comment:
|
Size: 1352
Comment:
|
| Deletions are marked like this. | Additions are marked like this. |
| Line 7: | Line 7: |
| * * stand alone, * * be less than 65 characters long, and * * give a quick idea of the content of the ChangeSet. |
* stand alone, * be less than 65 characters long, and * give a quick idea of the content of the ChangeSet. |
| Line 15: | Line 15: |
| Line 16: | Line 17: |
| Line 18: | Line 20: |
| Line 21: | Line 24: |
| * * The first line succinctly describes the change. * * The entire comment is short and informative. * * It mentions known shortcomings. |
* The first line succinctly describes the change. * The entire comment is short and informative. * It mentions known shortcomings. |
| Line 34: | Line 37: |
| Line 37: | Line 41: |
| * * First line doesn't stand alone * * No paragraph breaks -> poor readability * * Loads of uninformative detail |
* First line doesn't stand alone * No paragraph breaks -> poor readability * Loads of uninformative detail |
Writing good changeset comments
Many ["Mercurial"] tools use the first line of a ChangeSet comment as a short-form description of the ChangeSet.
You should thus treat the first line like the subject line of an email message. It should:
- stand alone,
- be less than 65 characters long, and
give a quick idea of the content of the ChangeSet.
Here is an example of a good ChangeSet comment:
First stab at the veeblefrotzer subsystem Implemented using the McWhirly/O'Blivet technique. Displays correctly on the twelfth of every month, but doesn't yet work during the other 27-30 days.
This has a few things going for it:
- The first line succinctly describes the change.
- The entire comment is short and informative.
- It mentions known shortcomings.
Here's a bad example:
Implemented the veeblefrotzer subsystem, which uses the McWhirly/O'Blivet scheme for envolvolution of the subducted whingnangle. See McWhirly, O'Blivet, "Acta Exsanguinata", vol. III, chap. 19 for a concise description of the technique, unless you can't find the chapter because someone has razored it out and papered it to the walls of their cube.
What's so bad about it?
- First line doesn't stand alone
No paragraph breaks -> poor readability
- Loads of uninformative detail