[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: log format for vc-bzr
From: |
Thien-Thi Nguyen |
Subject: |
Re: log format for vc-bzr |
Date: |
Fri, 08 Jan 2010 15:39:10 +0100 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.1.90 (gnu/linux) |
() Eli Zaretskii <address@hidden>
() Fri, 08 Jan 2010 14:52:54 +0200
Yes, I see that now, but if ttn called that ``personal junk'',
then I cannot disagree more. That's the history of my work; I
don't see how someone could object to having it in the public
repository. Without it, some changes, such as inadvertent
merge mistakes, can never be investigated and will remain a
mystery forever.
Although in personal projects i don't commit with the specific log
entry "gone to lunch", i *do* tend to make lots of small commits
with the pattern: open, futz, close. E.g.:
0 (open) add debug output (printf, message, etc)
1 (futz) split func into producer + consumer; nfc
2 make func take producer
3 update func callers to pass producer
4 add optional arg
5 update docs
6 (close) reindent caller-1
7 remove debug output
The end result of this series then is squashed into one commit
to the "trunk" (or whatever) as:
8 Don't hardcode `func' producer; make callers pass it in.
* src/file.ext (func) Take two more args: PRODUCER, OPTION.
(caller-1, caller-2): Update calls to `func'.
* doc/stuff.texi (API Infernals): Update `func' intro, docs.
I consider commits 0, 6 and 7 (open, close) to be ``personal
junk'' (ruminative, not so interesting, and potentially confusing
for ttn-in-six-months (weeks?, hours?)). Commits 1-5, on the
other hand, are interesting, but are not of publishable quality
for two reasons: (a) they introduce inconsistent state -- 2
introduces arity mismatch; (b) their log entries are incomplete
(albeit useful to synthesize later). I believe publishing those
as discrete commits would only add noise; they, too are ``personal
junk''.
Note that even though it is 8 that gets published, i can keep
0-7 in a local branch, untouched, for as long as i wish. Now,
it's not just personal, it's perpetual!
Perhaps i should add that i don't find junk objectionable; what
conscious bit-recycler and occasional garbage collector would?
thi
- Re: reversion revulsion, (continued)
- Re: reversion revulsion, Óscar Fuentes, 2010/01/08
- Re: reversion revulsion [was: log format for vc-bzr], Juanma Barranquero, 2010/01/08
- Re: reversion revulsion [was: log format for vc-bzr], Juanma Barranquero, 2010/01/08
- Re: log format for vc-bzr, Juanma Barranquero, 2010/01/08
- Re: log format for vc-bzr, Eli Zaretskii, 2010/01/08
- Re: log format for vc-bzr, Juanma Barranquero, 2010/01/08
- Re: log format for vc-bzr, Eli Zaretskii, 2010/01/08
- Re: log format for vc-bzr, Juanma Barranquero, 2010/01/08
- Re: log format for vc-bzr, Andreas Schwab, 2010/01/08
- Re: log format for vc-bzr, Juanma Barranquero, 2010/01/08
- Re: log format for vc-bzr,
Thien-Thi Nguyen <=
- bzr Q&A [was Re: log format for vc-bzr], Glenn Morris, 2010/01/08
- Re: bzr Q&A [was Re: log format for vc-bzr], Eli Zaretskii, 2010/01/09
- bzr Q&A [was Re: log format for vc-bzr], Stephen J. Turnbull, 2010/01/09
- Re: log format for vc-bzr, Stephen J. Turnbull, 2010/01/08
- Re: log format for vc-bzr, Eli Zaretskii, 2010/01/08
- Re: log format for vc-bzr, Juanma Barranquero, 2010/01/08
- Re: log format for vc-bzr, Stephen J. Turnbull, 2010/01/08
- Re: log format for vc-bzr, Eli Zaretskii, 2010/01/09
- Re: log format for vc-bzr, Óscar Fuentes, 2010/01/08
- Re: log format for vc-bzr, Eli Zaretskii, 2010/01/08