Open Stack

> From: Gorka Eguileor <geguileo at redhat.com>
> To: "OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)" 
> <openstack-dev at lists.openstack.org>
> Date: 09/29/2015 07:34 AM
> Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [all] -1 due to line length violation 
> in commit messages
...
> Since we are not all native speakers expecting everyone to realize that
> difference - which is completely right - may be a little optimistic,
> moreover considering that parts of those guidelines may even be written
> by non natives.
> 
> Let's say I interpret all "should" instances in that guideline as rules
> that don't need to be strictly enforced, I see that the Change-Id
> "should not be changed when rebasing" - this one would certainly be fun
> to watch if we didn't follow it - the blueprint "should give the name of
> a Launchpad blueprint" - I don't know any core that would not -1 a patch
> if he notices the BP reference missing - and machine targeted metadata
> "should all be grouped together at the end of the commit message" - this
> one everyone follows instinctively, so no problem.
> 
> And if we look at the i18n guidelines, almost everything is using
> should, but on reviews these are treated as strict *must* because of the
> implications.
> 
> Anyway, it's a matter of opinion and afaik in Cinder we don't even have
> a real problem with downvoting for the commit message length, I don't
> see more than 1 every couple of months or so.

Other communities have solved this by explicit reference to a standard 
defining terms like "must" and "should".

Regards,
Mike


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/attachments/20150930/ee81b8ae/attachment.html>