Attention is currently required from: Nicholas Chin. Angel Pons has posted comments on this change. ( https://review.coreboot.org/c/coreboot/+/58210 )
Change subject: util/autoport/bd82x6x.go: Fix includes ......................................................................
Patch Set 3: Code-Review+2
(1 comment)
Commit Message:
https://review.coreboot.org/c/coreboot/+/58210/comment/7fdd5002_6b26563c PS1, Line 9: CB:49344
Done, hope I did this correctly.
Yes, exactly. Note that Gerrit automatically turns `commit <hash>` into a link to the corresponding Gerrit change.
[Note: The following section is just for informational purposes. I don't think anything needs to be changed, but I believe you may find this information useful and/or interesting.]
People usually put the commit summary after the commit hash like this:
commit 661ad4666ca0e78195f6901fce7b44a7e56e6331 (ACPI: Select ACPI_SOC_NVS only where suitable)
I prefer this form when using abbreviated commit hashes (in case the abbreviated hash collides in the future), but I don't think it's needed with full commit hashes.
A drawback of full commit hashes is that they can't be split over multiple lines, which can result in oddly-shaped commit messages (e.g. unusually short lines). This gets worse with full commit hashes followed by their commit summary: coreboot commit summaries begin with a filepath, which can't be split over multiple lines either. This is just aesthetic, though.
I typically go with full commit hashes followed by their commit summary, and then I find a way to avoid unusually short lines in the commit message. Sometimes, I even make "rectangular" paragraphs, where all lines have the same length. That being said, writing a commit message like this sometimes takes longer than making the actual commit...