I'm used to comments in Git and Mercurial repositories:
- Commit comments, which may involve multiple files over the whole repository - has a comment. Commits without comments are possible, but rare (in my experience).
- Branch descriptions: These are the opposite in terms of use: Many people don't even know about them, and they're rarely used (in my experience).
I "know" what to write in commit comments (and branch descriptions if I use them). Various online tools even make assumptions about their content, e.g. BitBucket and GitHub which close issues for you, if you comment fixes #123
on the fixing commit.
But when working with ClearCase - which I'm new to - I find myself confused. You see, ClearCase versioning is per file; there are no all-repository commits; and there are "views", which are complex selections of versions for each of a repository's files.
There are also more types of comments than I'm used to:
- View comments - added to a newly-created view
- Branch type comments - files can have revisions in any of various named branch types; and when you create a new possible branch type, that gets a comment too
- Check-out comments - per file (or group of files) that's checked out
- Check-in comments - per file (or group of files) that's checked in
My question: Can you give a rule of thumb for what kind of text one should place in which kind of ClearCase comments? In a typical workflow?