[PINENTRY PATCH] add efl-based frontend

[Mike Blumenkrantz]

On Wed, 19 Oct 2016 14:07:41 +0200
Justus Winter <justus at g10code.com> wrote:

> Mike Blumenkrantz <michael.blumenkrantz at gmail.com> writes:
> > On Thu, Oct 13, 2016 at 8:28 AM Justus Winter <justus at g10code.com>
> > wrote:  
> >> The formatting of the commit message, however, does not.  Details
> >> can be found in the already mentioned doc/HACKING file.  At the
> >> very least, try to make it blend in with the other commit
> >> messages ;)  
> >
> > Can you elaborate on exactly which parts need changes? I tried to
> > follow the policy in that file, but there did not seem to be much
> > which could apply to adding new frontends like this.  
> 
> We write whole sentences, the first word starts with a capital letter,
> and we end sentences with a period.  We include ChangeLog-style
> entries for all affected files.  We start with a one-line summary
> that starts with a component followed by a colon, a space, and a
> whole sentence.
> 
> All of that should be obvious by just averaging over some of the
> recent commit messages even without looking at the documentation.
> 
> I realize that all of that is a matter of taste, and one cannot expect
> everyone to hunt down the docs, and follow it to the letter.  I don't
> believe we are particularly picky about this, but your message really
> sticks out.
> 
> 
> Cheers,
> Justus

Hi,

Thanks for your clarification. I've attached a new version of the patch
which I believe addresses all the issues you have cited in both the
contents of the patch and the commit log.


Since we are being very technical about the commit log, and you
specifically cited the docs, I'd like to point out that nowhere in the
docs/HACKING file
(https://git.gnupg.org/cgi-bin/gitweb.cgi?p=gnupg.git;a=blob;f=doc/HACKING#l21)
does it say anything about capitalization or punctuation. The prefixing
that you've mentioned, while common in commit messages, is referred to
something that is "usually" present, and it has no example for the
addition of new components. Furthermore, listing files with their
changes is also not in this document, nor is it done in every commit:
the top-most commit that I was working off in the tree is
https://git.gnupg.org/cgi-bin/gitweb.cgi?p=pinentry.git;a=commit;h=a383ddeb76463ddcf5aca2fb38847ea3158c42a7 and does not include it.
Based on this disconnect, it's easy to see why someone like
me who has been working off very direct RFC-style specifications
recently would produce a commit log which "stands out" :)

I'd be happy to submit a patch for the docs/HACKING file which
addresses these discrepancies to avoid any potential confusion
with future contributors.

Regards,
Mike
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: 0001-efl-Add-an-efl-based-frontend-for-pinentry.patch
Type: text/x-patch
Size: 25787 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: </pipermail/attachments/20161019/01b3e595/attachment-0001.bin>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: </pipermail/attachments/20161019/01b3e595/attachment-0001.sig>