From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS31976 209.132.180.0/23 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.7 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,RP_MATCHES_RCVD shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 55C4D1F4DD for ; Sat, 26 Aug 2017 19:01:02 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751116AbdHZTBA (ORCPT ); Sat, 26 Aug 2017 15:01:00 -0400 Received: from cloud.peff.net ([104.130.231.41]:50062 "HELO cloud.peff.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1751063AbdHZTA7 (ORCPT ); Sat, 26 Aug 2017 15:00:59 -0400 Received: (qmail 25447 invoked by uid 109); 26 Aug 2017 19:00:59 -0000 Received: from Unknown (HELO peff.net) (10.0.1.2) by cloud.peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.94) with SMTP; Sat, 26 Aug 2017 19:00:59 +0000 Authentication-Results: cloud.peff.net; auth=none Received: (qmail 24753 invoked by uid 111); 26 Aug 2017 19:01:28 -0000 Received: from Unknown (HELO sigill.intra.peff.net) (10.0.1.3) by peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.94) with SMTP; Sat, 26 Aug 2017 15:01:28 -0400 Authentication-Results: peff.net; auth=none Received: by sigill.intra.peff.net (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Sat, 26 Aug 2017 12:00:57 -0700 Date: Sat, 26 Aug 2017 12:00:57 -0700 From: Jeff King To: Brandon Williams Cc: Ivan Vyshnevskyi , git@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH/RFC] push: anonymize URL in error output Message-ID: <20170826190056.f53htagkoz6ydboe@sigill.intra.peff.net> References: <20170823094929.13541-1-sainaen@gmail.com> <20170823155826.m4s5y55x2esfoass@sigill.intra.peff.net> <82741094-19a6-e071-227d-f92b3b077a69@gmail.com> <20170825193743.GD103659@google.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20170825193743.GD103659@google.com> Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Aug 25, 2017 at 12:37:43PM -0700, Brandon Williams wrote: > > > My knee-jerk reaction is if it's worth writing after the dashes, it's > > > worth putting in the commit message. > > > > > > However, in the case I think it is OK as-is (the motivation of "we > > > already avoid leaking auth info to stdout, so we should do the same for > > > error messages" seems self-contained and reasonable) > > Well, I tend to be wordy, and most of the commit messages I saw were > > rather short, so decided to split. Wonder, if maybe example command > > should be included without the rest of it. Would it be useful? > > I'm guilty of writing short commit messages (something I need to work > on) but when looking through logs I much prefer to see longer messages > explaining rationals and trade-offs. I think as with all writing, there is both "too short" and "too long". I like having those extra bits in the commit message, too, but you have to make sure they don't drown out the main points. I find that when a message gets long, it often benefits from revising and re-ordering. E.g., having an intro paragraph that explains the motivation and solution in one sentence, and _then_ go into the details for people who are really digging into the details. Good organization lets readers get just the level they need and skip the rest. Easier said than done, of course. :) -Peff