Re: df --output

[Bernhard Voelker]

On 11/07/2012 02:04 PM, Pádraig Brady wrote:
>> thanks - although I still don't see much gain to have such jumbo
>> > commits instead of ~20 little, on-topic ones which would also make
>> > it easier for future looks back in git history in order to find out
>> > why something has been changed the way it has been changed, see e.g.
>> > the build system rework of Stefano. Your choice.
> Yes it's a trade off between short term and long term info.
> There is no value for example in keeping my whitespace fixup
> patch separate, nor fixes that were particular to the local branch
> (like the mem leak fix) as they may confuse future investigations.
> In future when doing `git blame` we can see immediately the change
> related to df --output.  Also the shortlog generated in release
> announcements is more feature focused than implementation focused.
> So while I'm not convinced on the roll-up approach, it seems
> like the better approach going forward.

Ideally, we'd have both: the bunch of single revisions and a
single merge commit, i.e., retain the development line on a
separate branch ... maybe that's overkill.

Have a nice day,
Berny