A little report on informal commit tag usage

On Fri, Jul 12, 2019 at 1:25 PM Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 11, 2019 at 09:44:07AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> > I thought we *did* have an agreement, to wit using
> >
> > Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/<message-id>
> >
> > to link to relevant mail thread(s). Some people use more tags
> > but that seems inessential to me.
>
> Hehe. I actually was thinking about advocating for having more of
> them in the commit logs. I'll just start a new thread about what I
> had in mind. Perhaps that will lead us nowhere, but let's see.

[Moving to -hackers]

Here are the tags that people have used in the past year, in commit messages:

763 Author
9 Authors
144 Backpatch-through
55 Backpatch
14 Bug
14 Co-authored-by
27 Diagnosed-By
1593 Discussion
42 Doc
284 Reported-By
5 Review
8 Reviewed by
456 Reviewed-By
7 Security
9 Tested-By

Other things I've noticed:

* a few people list authors and reviewers in prose in a fairly
mechanical paragraph
* some people put back-patch and bug number information in prose
* a few people list authors and reviewers with full email addresses
* some people repeat tags for multiple values, others make comma separated lists
* some people break long lines of meta-data with newlines
* authors "X and Y" may be an alternative to "X, Y", or imply greater
collaboration

The counts above were produced by case-insensitively sorting and
counting unique stuff that precedes a colon, and then throwing out
those used fewer than three times (these are false matches and typos),
and then throwing out a couple of obvious false matches by hand.
Starting from here:

git log --since 2018-07-14 | \
grep -E '^ *[A-Z].*: ' | \
sort -i | \
sed 's/:.*//' | \
uniq -ic | \
grep -v -E '^ *[12] '

--
Thomas Munro
https://enterprisedb.com