[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Emacs-diffs] master b6610d5 2/4: emacs-lisp/package.el: Refactor pr
From: |
Eli Zaretskii |
Subject: |
Re: [Emacs-diffs] master b6610d5 2/4: emacs-lisp/package.el: Refactor pre-execute prompt |
Date: |
Mon, 06 Apr 2015 17:15:14 +0300 |
> Date: Mon, 6 Apr 2015 15:01:22 +0100
> From: Artur Malabarba <address@hidden>
> Cc: emacs-devel <address@hidden>
>
> > I actually don't understand why those changes were pushed piecemeal,
> > and not as a single commit. They sound like a single changeset to me.
>
> There are many ways to divide changes into changesets. Sorry if mine
> was a little too detailed. The way I learned to do DVCS was to make
> commits small enough to be human-readable, but large enough that each
> one corresponds to a full working state (all tests passing, etc).
What's below follows my personal preferences, so please don't take it
as a mandatory requirement of some sort, just food for thought.
> Each one of these commits makes a significant change to at least 2
> functions, and I found them hard to read in a single commit so I split
> into a few. (In retrospect, the "package-install" commit turned out a
> bit trivial, and could be part of another one).
What I would do in this situation is work on a branch, make
fine-grained commits there, and then merge them all onto master in a
single merge-commit. Then, if someone follows first-parent, they'd
see a single commit with the feature, while still being able to
discern the separate commits you made during development.
IOW, I personally prefer not to see partial commits when I follow
first-parents.
> Do we have an objective definition of what a changeset should be?
No, it's a judgment call. For me, an important question that helps
the decision is "will I ever want to revert that single changeset?"
YMMV, most probably.
- Re: [Emacs-diffs] master b6610d5 2/4: emacs-lisp/package.el: Refactor pre-execute prompt, Dmitry Gutov, 2015/04/06
- Re: [Emacs-diffs] master b6610d5 2/4: emacs-lisp/package.el: Refactor pre-execute prompt, Eli Zaretskii, 2015/04/06
- Re: [Emacs-diffs] master b6610d5 2/4: emacs-lisp/package.el: Refactor pre-execute prompt, Artur Malabarba, 2015/04/06
- Re: [Emacs-diffs] master b6610d5 2/4: emacs-lisp/package.el: Refactor pre-execute prompt,
Eli Zaretskii <=
- Re: [Emacs-diffs] master b6610d5 2/4: emacs-lisp/package.el: Refactor pre-execute prompt, Artur Malabarba, 2015/04/06
- Re: [Emacs-diffs] master b6610d5 2/4: emacs-lisp/package.el: Refactor pre-execute prompt, Harald Hanche-Olsen, 2015/04/06
- Re: [Emacs-diffs] master b6610d5 2/4: emacs-lisp/package.el: Refactor pre-execute prompt, Artur Malabarba, 2015/04/06
- Re: [Emacs-diffs] master b6610d5 2/4: emacs-lisp/package.el: Refactor pre-execute prompt, Harald Hanche-Olsen, 2015/04/06
- Re: [Emacs-diffs] master b6610d5 2/4: emacs-lisp/package.el: Refactor pre-execute prompt, Eli Zaretskii, 2015/04/06
- Re: [Emacs-diffs] master b6610d5 2/4: emacs-lisp/package.el: Refactor pre-execute prompt, Harald Hanche-Olsen, 2015/04/06
- Re: [Emacs-diffs] master b6610d5 2/4: emacs-lisp/package.el: Refactor pre-execute prompt, Artur Malabarba, 2015/04/06
- Re: [Emacs-diffs] master b6610d5 2/4: emacs-lisp/package.el: Refactor pre-execute prompt, Stephen J. Turnbull, 2015/04/07
Re: [Emacs-diffs] master b6610d5 2/4: emacs-lisp/package.el: Refactor pre-execute prompt, Artur Malabarba, 2015/04/06