Re: [Gnu-arch-users] minor patch-log file format questions

[Miles Bader]

Tom Lord <address@hidden> writes:
>     > (1) Why are empty headers included?  
> 
> No particular reason.   

Hmmm, do you think it's safe to change?  I do find they make logs
significantly hard to read.

>     > (2) If you use commit's -L option, why is the single description line
>     >     repeated twice, once in the Summary: line, and once in the log body?
> 
> I don't think it matters much.  This format is easier to read when
> you're skipping past the headers just to look at the body of a log
> message.

It's all those empty headers hiding the Summary: header.  :-)

I find this behavior very annoying (I've stopped using commit -L because
of it), but I guess if you like it you're unlikely to take a patch to
change it.

How about a new option to commit that's just like -L, except that it
explicitly only sets the Summary: line?

Say:

  -s, --summary TEXT     log with TEXT as summary, log-for-merge output in body

It might also make things more readable to move the Summary: header to
the end of the headers, just before the body text.

Of course I'll gladly provide a patch do these.

Thanks,

-Miles
-- 
Saa, shall we dance?  (from a dance-class advertisement)