On Tue, Aug 14, 2007 at 12:55:30PM +0200, Herbert Graeber wrote:
Dr. Peter Poeml schrieb:
[...]
Now that it is possible to specify a commit message, should that be enforced by the user interface? Until now, the -m <msg> argument is optional.
The question is, whether "osc commit" should open $EDITOR if -m is not used. Just like svn does.
Yes, it should be enforced, else it is too easy to enter no commit message which is always bad.
Another question how such a message would be related to some changelog inside of the package. Maybe it is possible to have another option (Say -M) that tells osc to reuse some information from there.
osc would not be the place to implement this, as far as I can see. It would rather be the build service backend which could be configured to (principally) reuse the information from the commit log when adding to the rpm changelog. Or, it is also conceivable that osc takes the string which is specified via -m, and inserts it at the top of the .changes file and commits that. Or vice versa -- it could use the top entry of .changes as commit message. Personally, I think the latter makes most sense. What do others think? I may be a little Novell centric here. I'm not sure how widespread usage of a .changes file is, though. We might want to establish that, first... it is pretty much standard inside Novell, because the internal build system enforces this. Peter -- "WARNING: This bug is visible to non-employees. Please be respectful!" SUSE LINUX Products GmbH Research & Development