Re: Conflicts: field in commit messages

[Bálint Réczey <balint () balintreczey hu>]

Hi Guy,

2014-10-07 19:29 GMT+02:00 Guy Harris <guy () alum mit edu>:
> On Oct 7, 2014, at 1:12 AM, Michal Labedzki <michal.labedzki () tieto com> wrote:
>
> > You miss one thing - cherry-pick with conflicts is not the same that
> > original commit.
>
> That's what "with manual intervention" is for, as per my earlier message.
>
> > It may build and work in 99% cases of original use,
> > but may file because one conflicts can be "not correctly" resolved.
>
> Presumably "fail" means "fail at run time" rather than "fail to build".
>
> When I see "Conflicts:" in a commit message, it reads to *me* as if either
>
>         1) somebody forgot to resolve the conflicts and is committing the broken result
Since our policy is not committing something which does not build and
in the future it will be enforced automatically you can't see the
message in master / or in an other branch.

> or
>
>         2) somebody resolved the conflicts but forgot to edit the commit message.
With our current practice this would be the most probable case.
I think however keeping them in the message instead of replacing them
with " with manual intervention" would save some work and keep more
information

Cheers,
Balint
___________________________________________________________________________
Sent via:    Wireshark-dev mailing list <wireshark-dev () wireshark org>
Archives:    http://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-dev
Unsubscribe: https://wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-dev
             mailto:wireshark-dev-request () wireshark org?subject=unsubscribe