1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
|
as of git-annex version 3.20110719, all git-annex commits only contain the word "update" as a commit message. given that the contents of the commit are pretty non-descriptive (SHA1 hashes for file names, uuids for repository names), i suggest to have more descriptive commit messages, as shown here:
/mnt/usb_disk/photos/2011$ git annex get
/mnt/usb_disk/photos/2011$ git show git-annex
[...]
usb-disk-photos: get 2011
* 10 files retrieved from 2 sources (9 from local-harddisk, 1 from my-server)
* 120 files were already present
* 2 files could not be retrieved
/mnt/usb_disk/photos/2011$ cd ~/photos/2011/07
~/photos/2011/07$ git copy --to my-server
~/photos/2011/07$ git show git-annex
[...]
local-harddisk: copy 2011/07 to my-server
* 20 files pushed
~/photos/2011/07$
in my opinion, the messages should at least contain
* what command was used
* in which repository they were executed
* which files or directories they affected (not necessarily all files, but what was given on command line or implicitly from the working directory)
--[[chrysn]]
> The implementation of the git-annex branch precludes more descriptive
> commit messages, since a single commit can include changes that were
> previously staged to the branch's index file, or spooled to its journal
> by other git-annex commands (either concurrently running or
> interrupted commands, or even changes needed to automatically merge
> other git-annex branches).
>
> It would be possible to make it *less* verbose, with an empty commit
> message. :) --[[Joey]]
>> Closing as this is literally impossible to do without making
>> git-annex worse. [[done]] --[[Joey]]
> I'm not sure that the requested feature is that far off. There are two
> aspects, that can be solved relatively easy:
>
> * Recording the name of the remote the commit was issued on. This
> information is simply constant per remote.
>
> * While it is true that there is no 1 on 1 correspondence between commands
> and git-annex commits, it would be entirely possible to add a "message
> journal". Every command issued would start out with writing its
> invocation to the message journal. At the time the journal ends up being
> committed to the git-annex branch, the message journal is used as the
> body of the commit message and truncated.
>
> It is true that these suggestions do not address every aspect of the
> original report, but they would solve about 90%. --[[HelmutGrohne]]
|
