Linus Torvalds expressed frustration over the use of passive voice in merge commit messages, preferring active and imperative language instead.
He provided an example of how commit messages should be rewritten for clarity and consistency across the project.
Torvalds noted that while it’s not a major issue, it does add extra work when he has to rewrite messages to match his preference.
And here it is in the kernel contribution documentation.
Simple example:
Added foo interface.So the commit says what applying the patch will do, not what you worked on.
This has been the recommendation and the way to do it for decades everywhere I’ve been too.
Another commit style is summarizing what a commit does. In this case it would be someting like:
I think this style is more in line with auditing code.