Re: VC mode and git

[Alan Mackenzie <acm@muc.de>]

Hello, Stephen.

On Thu, Apr 02, 2015 at 06:11:59AM +0900, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
> Alan Mackenzie writes:

>  > Stephen, that is complete sophistry.

> Will you stop the name calling?

OK.  Will you stop using rhetorical tricks to throw my arguments and
questions off track?

>  > Git should support how ever often a developper wants to commit,
>  > whether every 5 minutes or just once per fix.

> It does.  It just doesn't support your workflow by default, so you
> have to learn more than a few bare commands that DWIM.

[ .... ]

> Do you save your "dirty linen"?  If you don't, I bet your Emacs does.

Yes and yes.

>  > [I] simply want an appropriate tool for communicating changes from
>  > and to savannah.  I know I'm not the only one.  I think you have
>  > trouble accepting this position.

> I have no trouble accepting that position.  I'm simply unwilling to
> exert any effort on your behalf, because I like git the way it is.
> OTOH, my acceptance does you no good, because Emacs uses git.  That
> is:

>  > It seems the real answer is "everybody" commits often, so it must
>  > be good thing to do.  I've never found that sort of reasoning
>  > persuasive.

> No, the real answer is that "everybody" commits often, so there is no
> willingness to change git to serve the "nobody" who doesn't.

You've done it again.  The question was "why do people advocate frequent
committing?".  You've snipped the question from the record and then
supplied a non-answer to it.  Please stop doing things like this.

The topic of changing git was never up for discussion, and it's
irritating to have to deal with the insinuation I had mooted this.

As for why people commit often, it seems they do it because they do it,
and "everybody else" does.  I was hoping we could move beyond that.  It
seems we can't.

> You can throw all the tantrums you want, but unless you rewrite git
> and/or vc yourself, it won't get done.  Of course you'd have to learn a
> hell of a lot about git to be able to do so.

Who's name calling now?  ;-)

>  > I have asked for git help in the past, and got answers varying in
>  > quality from the deliberately infuriating to just right.  But doing
>  > this takes up other people's time, so I don't like doing it too
>  > often.  Perhaps I'm just too used to finding the answers to simple
>  > questions in documentation.

> The questions you are asking are *not* simple, because your
> requirements are misaligned with those of the git developers.

Wanting to know what git merge uses for its sources, and where it writes
its results would seem a simple and obvious enough thing to want to know.

-- 
Alan Mackenzie (Nuremberg, Germany).