When committing a change that needs a specific change from another project, but
that other change is still in the gerrit queue and has no final git commit hash
yet, it is handy to use the Change-Id to reference the given decision.
Harald recently requested that I always include the Change-Id in the commit
log.
Now Max says:
It's better to update commit log with git commit
hash instead of change-id
before final submission.
Can we get consensus? Should we modify the commit log from Change-Id to git
hash once the required other commit is through?
The Change-Id is always there and can be searched for in the git log; and
should we ever decide to rehash the git history or move to another version
control software (losing all git hashes), the Change-Id would still be there.
But the git hash, once it is finalized, can be used directly on the git
commandline.
I wouldn't have done the extra effort, but if all agree that the git hash is
better, I'll change it (and hopefully remember to do it, too).
~N