Re: Odd instructions for Git?

[Simos <simos lists googlemail com>]

On Sat, Apr 4, 2009 at 10:31 PM, Stéphane Raimbault
<stephane raimbault gmail com> wrote:
> 2009/4/4 Claude Paroz <claude 2xlibre net>:
>> No, commits should always contain all files containing logically related
>> modifications. Committing the Makefile.am modification without the
>> corresponding po has no sense. In your example, I would commit it as:
>> git commit Makefile.am LL.po LL/figures/*.png
>> Then an editor will appear, and the commit message should contain one
>> short description line, and possibly a longer description on a second
>> paragraph:
>>
>> Added LL help translation
>>
>> LL added to DOC_LINGUAS, screenshots added in figures, ...
>>
>> However, in this case I think the short description is enough. People
>> aren't stupid and they can easily figure out what happened and why files
>> has been added/modified through consulting the logs/diffs.
>>
>
> Yes, a commit must always be atomic (and so be easy to review or
> revert) and it's true for any VCS/DVCS able to handle changeset (SVN,
> git, hg, bzr, monotone, etc).
>
> Simos, please, could you revert this part in the wiki?

Hi Stéphane,

Feel free to make the correction as you see suitable.

Cheers,
Simos