Proposals for commit log policy

[Brad Bishop]

> On Aug 22, 2018, at 7:58 PM, Joel Stanley <joel at jms.id.au> wrote:
> 
> On Tue, 21 Aug 2018 at 22:01, Alexander Amelkin <a.amelkin at yadro.com> wrote:
> 
>> =================
>> some-package: bump version 62286ef3 to 4fa63380
>> 
>> Author Name (2):
>>  commit 1 synopsis
>>  another commit synopsis
>> 
>> Another Author (3):
>>  great commit
>>  yet another great commit
>>  fix previous not-so-great commit
>> 
>> Change-Id: some-long-gerrit-hash
>> Signed-off-by: The Version Bumper <bumper at nowhere.net>
>> =================
> 
>> What do you think? Is this feasible? Any other ideas how we could simplify creating release notes suitable for end users?
> 
> I think this is a great suggestion. I would also like to see this happen.
> 
> Having the maintainers or authors of the packages submit their bumps
> would ensure this does not become a burden for the central repository
> maintainer.
> 
> An advantage of the maintainers of individual packages submitting
> their changes is they know the best timing for integrating their
> changes, and know what relevant details should be added to the bump
> commit message.

I also would like to see this.  To be clear I mean the commit msg text above,
and not a ‘Impact’ token.  

The autobump script was deployed at a time in the project when _every_ repository
had the same maintainer, so it made some sense back then.  Today we have a much
more distributed set of maintainers.

I’ve actually disabled the cron job that runs the script, because it needed
some rework to handle the new openbmc/openbmc repository layout.

I plan on simply _not_ turning it back on, and let maintainers do their own
bumps like Joel has been doing for the kernel moving forward (Thanks Joel).
Unless there are major objections.

thx - brad

> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Joel