elisp + company completion patches, v7

[Tomi Ollila]

On Mon, Oct 26 2015, Carl Worth <cworth at cworth.org> wrote:

> On Sun, Oct 25 2015, Tomi Ollila wrote:
>> I, if this does not sound nitpicking, would amend those 'This patch' and
>> 'With this patch' texts in commit messages away by some rewording -- those
>> pose as a bad example for someone reading the code -- and diminish the
>> effect when I complain that again in future patched ;)
>
> What's the motivation here?
>
> It's often the case that a good commit message needs to describe the way
> things were working prior to a commit, (describing the bug or missing
> feature or what have you), and also needs to describe the change that is
> affected by the commit itself.
>
> So I actually like seeing commit messages that say things like:
>
>     Prior to this commit... (some bug existed...)
>
>     In this commit... (some code is reworked to fix the bug...)
>
> But maybe I've missed the point of your message.
>
>
> -Carl

Probably the missing point is the fine distinction between 
'this patch' and 'this commit'

While we do sets of changes and then that leads to commit series the final
step of running 'git format-patch' somehow leads people writing commit
message to add words 'this patch' to the message...
... or (what just come into my mind) they just think these changes as
patches (is that linux-kernel influence ?)

To me the commit history does not look like series of patches (but series
of commits or changes -- and changes are usually shown as "diffs") --
patching gives a connotation of fixing something (with glue or gum ;)

That is how I see it. That doesn't mean I am right there (and in this mailing
list I've been wrong in statistically significant amount (*) of times).

Un{less,til} decided otherwise I'll continue with delicate efforts to
keep this style issue in the minds of developers; despite (**) informing
me that will be doomed...

Tomi

(*) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Statistical_significance
(**) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wiio%27s_laws