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