I like it. Wording and placement are spot on.

Thanks.

On Sun, May 12, 2024, 08:42 Simon Josefsson via Gnulib discussion list <
bug-gnulib@gnu.org> wrote:

> All,
>
> Our release announcements does not mention the git commit hash that was
> used to prepare the release.  While SHA1 is broken, I still think
> including the commit hash provide some additional information that may
> be useful further down the line, and hopefully including doesn't incur
> too much cognitive load on the reader (that isn't already present..).
>
> I haven't pushed the attached patch since I'm not a native speaker.
> Could someone suggest better wording, if needed?  Or better placement in
> the announcement?
>
> To read the result of the patch in context, take some earlier
> announcement:
>
> https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/info-gnu/2024-03/msg00006.html
>
> and then consider that the patch would turn the following snippet (for a
> hypothethical upcoming GNU inetutils release) text:
>
> This release was bootstrapped with the following tools:
>   Gnulib aacceb6eff
>   Autoconf 2.71
>   Automake 1.16.5
>   Bison 3.8.2
>   M4 1.4.18
>   Makeinfo 6.8
>   Help2man 1.49.1
>   Make 4.3
>   Gzip 1.10
>   Tar 1.34
>
> and turn that into this:
>
> This release was built bootstrapped with the following tools
> using inetutils git commit 524d4b6934db12b9f43be410d2f201fdb40cfc97:
>
>   Gnulib aacceb6eff
>   Autoconf 2.71
>   Automake 1.16.5
>   Bison 3.8.2
>   M4 1.4.18
>   Makeinfo 6.8
>   Help2man 1.49.1
>   Make 4.3
>   Gzip 1.10
>   Tar 1.34
>
> Does this make sense?  Is the location in the announcement e-mail a good
> one?  This hides it a bit further down which I think makes sense.  Few
> readers care about git commit and bootstrapping versions, and the
> information is related.  The new version adds an empty line which I
> think is more consistent with the other paragraphs.
>
> Thoughts?
>
> /Simon
>