Open Stack

@Aleksandr: it seems you are right, after my first broken commit message I
was careful not to mess them up again and I didn't even notice that this
check was turned off. Just curious: why was it turned off?

On Wed, Jul 29, 2015 at 11:24 AM, Igor Kalnitsky <ikalnitsky at mirantis.com>
wrote:

> Guys,
>
> How do you suppose to know that only commit message was changed? Do
> you want to implement manual comparison between patch sets?!
>
> Currently Gerrit checks whether patchset was changed or not by
> tracking Git commit SHA1 sum, and, btw, chaning commit message will
> lead to changing commit sha1 sum.
>
> So it looks pretty tricky to implement, and it may lead to false
> positive results.
>
> Thanks,
> Igor
>
> On Wed, Jul 29, 2015 at 12:06 PM, Sergii Golovatiuk
> <sgolovatiuk at mirantis.com> wrote:
> > I agree with Maciej
> >
> > 1. Simple change in CommitMessage shouldn't spin up CI check
> > 2. There should be simple task where we check "Implements: blueprint" or
> > "Closes-Bug:" or Related-Bug:" to set -1 automatically
> > 3. There can be additional checks like Short Summary should be 50 or less
> > symbols. Long summary should be wrapped to 80 symbols
> >
> >
> > --
> > Best regards,
> > Sergii Golovatiuk,
> > Skype #golserge
> > IRC #holser
> >
> > On Wed, Jul 29, 2015 at 10:58 AM, Aleksandr Didenko <
> adidenko at mirantis.com>
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> > I think that checking commit message compliance to commit message
> >> > guidelines (for example ending the first line with dot) is part of CI
> jobs,
> >> > and they will vote -1 if message is wrongly structured.
> >>
> >>
> >> Maciej, we don't have such checks at the moment. You can craft any
> commit
> >> message you want and it will not cause any problems with CI. I think,
> >> reviewers could do the job on commit message verification and they
> already
> >> do this :)
> >>
> >> Regards,
> >> Alex
> >>
> >>
> >> On Wed, Jul 29, 2015 at 11:23 AM, Sergey Vasilenko
> >> <svasilenko at mirantis.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> -1 to Maciej
> >>> +1 to Sergii
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> /sv
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> __________________________________________________________________________
> >>> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
> >>> Unsubscribe:
> >>> OpenStack-dev-request at lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
> >>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> __________________________________________________________________________
> >> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
> >> Unsubscribe:
> OpenStack-dev-request at lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
> >> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> __________________________________________________________________________
> > OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
> > Unsubscribe:
> OpenStack-dev-request at lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
> > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
> >
>
> __________________________________________________________________________
> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
> Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request at lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/attachments/20150729/fc55ab42/attachment.html>