Re: log format for vc-bzr

[Óscar Fuentes]

Andreas Schwab <address@hidden> writes:

>>> There is nothing wrong with that, but do that only in your private local
>>> branch and don't publish those junk commits.  They carry no value.
>>
>> What about the example I posted before? With the recommended distributed
>> workflow, you are going to *double* the history length with redundant
>> entries:
>>
>> 1343 Fixed bug #2423  (merge)
>> 1343.1 Fixed bug #2423 (original commit)
>>
>> Isn't that junk?
>
> Yes, there is no value in a merge like this, it can just as well put
> directly on the branch.

Well, we will see *lots* of history entries like that.

It is a byproduct of the distributed workflow. An insignificant one,
because you are not supposed to look into the merge histories of
microbranches. That's why bzr defaults to not showing merged histories.

The Emacs project is about producing a great piece of software, not
about producing a very nice VC log. If we have to introduce quite a bit
of junk into the *hidden* VC history of the project on exchange for a
better experience while developing the code, it is a good deal, IMO.

-- 
Óscar