From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 71704 invoked by alias); 15 May 2015 12:28:44 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org Received: (qmail 71691 invoked by uid 89); 15 May 2015 12:28:43 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-1.2 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,KAM_LAZY_DOMAIN_SECURITY autolearn=no version=3.3.2 X-HELO: rock.gnat.com Received: from rock.gnat.com (HELO rock.gnat.com) (205.232.38.15) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with (AES256-SHA encrypted) ESMTPS; Fri, 15 May 2015 12:28:42 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by filtered-rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C9B9BD3F44; Fri, 15 May 2015 08:28:40 -0400 (EDT) Received: from rock.gnat.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (rock.gnat.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id 6iGWDKeUMDtH; Fri, 15 May 2015 08:28:40 -0400 (EDT) Received: from joel.gnat.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A4D51D3B38; Fri, 15 May 2015 08:28:40 -0400 (EDT) Received: by joel.gnat.com (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 2C9B540DAA; Fri, 15 May 2015 05:28:44 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 15 May 2015 12:28:00 -0000 From: Joel Brobecker To: Pedro Alves Cc: Gary Benson , gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: Descriptive subjects Message-ID: <20150515122844.GK4767@adacore.com> References: <20150515075915.GA14783@blade.nx> <5555DA64.9030101@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <5555DA64.9030101@redhat.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) X-SW-Source: 2015-05/txt/msg00382.txt.bz2 > > May I ask that people send emails to this list with more descriptive > > subjects than, e.g., "Fix PR/12345". The numbers don't stick in my > > head even after I've seen them 20 times, so I have to look in all > > these emails to determine whether I need to read them. I'm sure I'm > > not alone. > > Agreed. +1. In fact, I would even suggest that we follow that guideline for revision logs as well. When going through the log trying to identify the commits that might be responsible for a change in behavior, "PR bla/12345" is not very helpful for that. -- Joel