From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Thien-Thi Nguyen Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: log format for vc-bzr Date: Fri, 08 Jan 2010 15:39:10 +0100 Message-ID: <87my0ofypd.fsf@ambire.localdomain> References: <200912081747.nB8HlwPR021836@godzilla.ics.uci.edu> <871vj3sxgy.fsf@telefonica.net> <87ws0vrd46.fsf@telefonica.net> <87hbqxa9ti.fsf@ambire.localdomain> <87k4vtd1uy.fsf@telefonica.net> <83ljg9as4g.fsf@gnu.org> <83bph4byb6.fsf@gnu.org> <831vi0bvx5.fsf@gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1262961976 21677 80.91.229.12 (8 Jan 2010 14:46:16 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 8 Jan 2010 14:46:16 +0000 (UTC) To: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Jan 08 15:46:01 2010 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1NTG68-0004fe-R7 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 08 Jan 2010 15:45:57 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:52540 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1NTG69-0000ON-9p for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 08 Jan 2010 09:45:57 -0500 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1NTG21-0003t5-Vi for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 08 Jan 2010 09:41:42 -0500 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1NTG20-0003rX-NK for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 08 Jan 2010 09:41:41 -0500 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=53181 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1NTG20-0003rG-Fv for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 08 Jan 2010 09:41:40 -0500 Original-Received: from smtp-out05a.alice.it ([85.33.3.5]:3847) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1NTG1z-0002GM-Ty for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 08 Jan 2010 09:41:40 -0500 Original-Received: from FBCMMO02.fbc.local ([192.168.68.196]) by smtp-OUT05A.alice.it with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Fri, 8 Jan 2010 15:41:36 +0100 Original-Received: from FBCMCL01B07.fbc.local ([192.168.171.45]) by FBCMMO02.fbc.local with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Fri, 8 Jan 2010 15:41:36 +0100 Original-Received: from ambire.localdomain ([79.24.23.250]) by FBCMCL01B07.fbc.local with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Fri, 8 Jan 2010 15:41:35 +0100 Original-Received: from ttn by ambire.localdomain with local (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1NTFza-0008GY-69 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 08 Jan 2010 15:39:10 +0100 In-Reply-To: <831vi0bvx5.fsf@gnu.org> (Eli Zaretskii's message of "Fri, 08 Jan 2010 14:52:54 +0200") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.1.90 (gnu/linux) X-OriginalArrivalTime: 08 Jan 2010 14:41:35.0871 (UTC) FILETIME=[ADB7A0F0:01CA9070] X-detected-operating-system: by monty-python.gnu.org: Windows 2000 SP4, XP SP1+ X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:119698 Archived-At: () Eli Zaretskii () 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