[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: log format for vc-bzr
From: |
Óscar Fuentes |
Subject: |
Re: log format for vc-bzr |
Date: |
Tue, 08 Dec 2009 23:36:53 +0100 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.1.50 (gnu/linux) |
Dan Nicolaescu <address@hidden> writes:
> Andreas Schwab <address@hidden> writes:
>
> > Óscar Fuentes <address@hidden> writes:
> >
> > > Useless for whom? For the developer who is working on the feature? No,
> > > they are small milestones and state-savers (for synchronizing his
> > > desktop with his laptop, for instance). For the other developers? Yes,
> > > but that's the reason why merged history is hidden by default.
> >
> > Such a useless commit history should never be published in the first
> > place.
>
> And to build on your argument: if the developer decides to put something
> in a log, then it must be relevant,
For who?
> so we should show it by default.
Okay, here is a more realistic log example. A user occassionally hacks
on Emacs for short periods and decided to implement a small feature:
1 created stubs for `foo' and `bar'. Call them from `zoo'.
2 merge from upstream.
3 implemented `foo'.
4 implemented `bar'.
5 implementation of `foo' was broken beyond hope. remove it.
6 merge from upstream.
7 `foo' implemeted, take two.
8 merge from upstream.
9 some code cleaning.
10 merge from upstream.
For the hacker which is working on that branch, this looks as a very
reasonable and informative history. But for the rest of us it is
uninteresting.
If you intend to set a policy that only changes which are relevant to
the general community enters the history of the *private* feature
branches of a given developer, or that the developer must remove the
local history before sending the change upstream... well, you are
throwing down the drain one of the most appreciated qualities of a dVCS:
to have a VCS for personal use with the ability of integrating the final
result into some other branch.
Using the dVCS will be painful but, hey, `log --include-merges' will
result on an impressive amount of information! :-) (Actually, under such
policy, `log --include-merges' will add no information at all, except
for the lon-lived branches of the kind of multi-tty, etc.)
--
Óscar
- log format for vc-bzr, Dan Nicolaescu, 2009/12/08
- Re: log format for vc-bzr, Óscar Fuentes, 2009/12/08
- Re: log format for vc-bzr, Andreas Schwab, 2009/12/08
- Re: log format for vc-bzr, Óscar Fuentes, 2009/12/08
- Re: log format for vc-bzr, Andreas Schwab, 2009/12/08
- Re: log format for vc-bzr, Dan Nicolaescu, 2009/12/08
- Re: log format for vc-bzr,
Óscar Fuentes <=
- Re: log format for vc-bzr, Jason Earl, 2009/12/08
- Re: log format for vc-bzr, Andreas Schwab, 2009/12/09
- Re: log format for vc-bzr, Stephen J. Turnbull, 2009/12/09
- Re: log format for vc-bzr, Stefan Monnier, 2009/12/09
- Re: log format for vc-bzr, Óscar Fuentes, 2009/12/09
- Re: log format for vc-bzr, Andreas Schwab, 2009/12/09
- Re: log format for vc-bzr, Óscar Fuentes, 2009/12/09
- Re: log format for vc-bzr, Andreas Schwab, 2009/12/09
- Re: log format for vc-bzr, Stephen J. Turnbull, 2009/12/09
- Re: log format for vc-bzr, Andreas Schwab, 2009/12/10