From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Workflow to accumulate individual changes? Date: Thu, 31 Dec 2009 05:44:08 -0500 Message-ID: References: <87fx6sm8yl.fsf@telefonica.net> <873a2slzrr.fsf@telefonica.net> <83ws03db8v.fsf@gnu.org> Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1262256290 27648 80.91.229.12 (31 Dec 2009 10:44:50 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 31 Dec 2009 10:44:50 +0000 (UTC) Cc: ofv@wanadoo.es, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Juanma Barranquero Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Thu Dec 31 11:44:42 2009 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 1NQIWI-0003rU-C7 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 31 Dec 2009 11:44:42 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:58029 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1NQIWI-0002Pz-MJ for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 31 Dec 2009 05:44:42 -0500 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1NQIVq-0002Et-UD for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 31 Dec 2009 05:44:15 -0500 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1NQIVl-0002BP-N7 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 31 Dec 2009 05:44:13 -0500 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=57118 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1NQIVl-0002BK-Dy for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 31 Dec 2009 05:44:09 -0500 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([140.186.70.10]:56836) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1NQIVl-00049O-1m for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 31 Dec 2009 05:44:09 -0500 Original-Received: from eliz by fencepost.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1NQIVk-0007yV-LC; Thu, 31 Dec 2009 05:44:08 -0500 In-reply-to: (message from Juanma Barranquero on Thu, 31 Dec 2009 05:36:30 +0100) X-detected-operating-system: by monty-python.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 3) 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:119133 Archived-At: From: Eli Zaretskii To: Juanma Barranquero CC: ofv@wanadoo.es, emacs-devel@gnu.org In-reply-to: (message from Juanma Barranquero on Thu, 31 Dec 2009 05:36:30 +0100) Subject: Re: Workflow to accumulate individual changes? Reply-to: Eli Zaretskii References: <87fx6sm8yl.fsf@telefonica.net> <873a2slzrr.fsf@telefonica.net> <83ws03db8v.fsf@gnu.org> --text follows this line-- > From: Juanma Barranquero > Date: Thu, 31 Dec 2009 05:36:30 +0100 > Cc: ofv@wanadoo.es, emacs-devel@gnu.org > > Personally, and with all due respect, I don't consider this: "There > are many theoretical objections to rebasing, and I won’t rehash them > here. There’s general consensus that rebasing is sort of icky." as a > sort of expert opinion, just biased. Me neither. I'm talking about the rest of the reasons, which _are_ described in detail. > People used to git's rebase find it extremely useful. I don't know anything about git, so I cannot talk about this. Just remember that Stephen pointed to a posting by Linus who very eloquently explained how rebasing is a bad idea in at least one situation. > Weren't I thinking that ChangeLog present problems that should be > discussed, I wouldn't have brought the issue. If ChangeLog maintenance is such a big problem, I think we should resolve it here and now. Otherwise, it's a tail wagging the dog. > > ChangeLog files will present a problem for feature branches and > > quick-fix branches alike.  Though an annoyance, I don't see how it is > > a problem significant enough to recommend rebase as the main vehicle > > of routine work, given the downside of rebasing (rewriting history > > etc.). > > > > Am I missing something? > > Yes. Neither of us is "recommending rebase as the main vehicle of > routine work". I was talking very specifically of a workflow I intend > to use, but I have no idea how common it'll be for other people; and > for my use, an interactive rebase would be a perfect option. I > wouldn't dream of suggest Karl to discuss rebase on BzrForEmacsDevs, > for example. ChangeLog's are part of everyone's workflow (unless we decide to stop using them). If we think ChangeLog's are causing significant inconveniences that are not addressed in the recommended workflow, and if rebasing is the recommended solution for that, then we had better address these issues now, and by all means mention them on the wiki. IOW, what annoys Juanma Barranquero, will probably annoy a few more, so I would not dismiss that as Juanma's private problems whose solution concerns no one but Juanma ;-)