From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: martin rudalics Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: master has switched from Automake to GNU Make Date: Fri, 24 Mar 2017 19:53:39 +0100 Message-ID: <58D56B33.9050408@gmx.at> References: <58CB9F6B.5080806@gmx.at> <83h92sz2j9.fsf@gnu.org> <58CBAEB7.5030601@gmx.at> <58CBBC6C.8000104@gmx.at> <58D380FF.1070103@gmx.at> <58D3C84E.5080808@gmx.at> <58D4E0D6.2070101@gmx.at> <86r31mlrj1.fsf@molnjunk.nocrew.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1490381767 18129 195.159.176.226 (24 Mar 2017 18:56:07 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 24 Mar 2017 18:56:07 +0000 (UTC) To: Lars Brinkhoff , emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Mar 24 19:56:04 2017 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by blaine.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1crUNN-0003R7-Jv for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 24 Mar 2017 19:55:53 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:34544 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1crUNS-0002au-5q for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 24 Mar 2017 14:55:58 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:56646) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1crULL-0001fw-0K for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 24 Mar 2017 14:53:48 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1crULH-0000yY-Tz for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 24 Mar 2017 14:53:47 -0400 Original-Received: from mout.gmx.net ([212.227.17.22]:53078) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1crULH-0000yL-KT for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 24 Mar 2017 14:53:43 -0400 Original-Received: from [192.168.1.100] ([213.162.68.26]) by mail.gmx.com (mrgmx103 [212.227.17.168]) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 0MYfJW-1cekdQ0ryM-00VTHN; Fri, 24 Mar 2017 19:53:42 +0100 In-Reply-To: <86r31mlrj1.fsf@molnjunk.nocrew.org> X-Provags-ID: V03:K0:eYyW5ij+U9dUbIDahwW8MysVljqf4DqiK3S/7lqnJJ6hDq0kfqM Ej5SLI9HOZC9cIE/WMAG6XbzGNiZmXctOTPajBSVXqBVWrjvEfxb4CIDMRCVPSHWwYg5Cpe zmq7e9AnfBnvsF/ftqyXeeNdlex3XJu6MoERjwJD67MoBevyJiC74Hzk4K6ZySNmvV7bMJU yEjeN2lBGtutarrQUqLKg== X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1;V01:K0:QYojP5pk++c=:C6nuYOh8El6IoOAzkFeqbK FU/VhE/dIk3gFBYGzJC5rMgDy2jjcoQgjzfieCIxp4FRKA4z0qEZ16emfGStZXAsK+NhFK7EJ iWAx71fuj4IcNwb3WLnxBlTFyAnR5rPmc0ZIK7hSmsvCd6RK6uuwcfMnHS2Iqb0orh1YQzzys zgqEaAbQcb6Av5OtuPeO2HSHBLKJet2gE8mlPjYI5+HqlRErLboVk67i8kdjKSvh564OzCGjr ZhvYZr+XHkMDWB8NwmWKvCdL5FOigtQ2bPNmr96ZtHwwmgqUMKPq2v6LdYbeMpyW9XMj13bpC z5N4Iq3trRdH2oSH6H0WITlLRAcmWTg/4D0fODir8t77nlVBHPj+JgBGEvlf/11m8qLZ8izww 1Nd9RLj5uDzp1OX51NIbJF/+Oj7PPN1JwEEfGiuyRSS4gfKaE5QL/YGh1voUpvZrzaAcHfWWT dH2K5je5n5yoLS2K+/Ja51AL7YjF/8UZ3zQ7K5eH8J2Ajfh8JNyAzpyW3bGAF7EibnCyLZpFw 57T1CfRbFlLRwFm9SUgWtincKBUzcfFWLs400vNQtRKKTTUMBZWbbdtXiWNETIlHwvnu8nEA1 LXHb2o35l6TLuo63dcs8Q4WuqNkbKuMpnTKfG9JKoasmSDQdLQ5wd07mWYDtrCA5U82FWTn+a obIPnChzAKigrmu+ucPC6kYgmbVKr9wQPzTxOjEs8PO+DCx/1m5vQC6Uu9wQrLNHBjzCK8qqJ naayyxoqLbwat3HemYfhstKi5RdaDsvOHqIDkk7uP8EWwFYFOXFrTGO0XGvzEVY9kUZM8EI6 X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] [fuzzy] X-Received-From: 212.227.17.22 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "Emacs-devel" Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:213311 Archived-At: >> Isn't one of the primary purposes of a branch (besides of sharing) to >> record the historically accurate picture of how its authors arrived at >> the present state? > > That is one view of version control. If you talk about version history, > it's kind of almost implied that it's an accurate record of historical > events. Many version control tools support this model and make it > difficult to go outside it. > > But version control tools can also support another model. Git in > particular isn't big on enforcing historical accuracy. In this other > view, version control is just about files, and their contents and > changes. Files can be rewritten, and so can the changes. It's just as > natural as editing files without recording every single change in the > final version. But a branch in scratch does not represent a final version. It represents work in progress. And it should be open to collaborate modifications. Why else would you make your branch public? > Remember when you submitted changes as a series of patches? Maybe not, > it was some years ago. Anyway, in many projects, the way changes were > propsed were to email a series of patches to a mailing list. Of course, > all patches were required to apply cleanly to the current version of the > software. Also, every individual patch was required to do one atomic, > logical change. > > When the base version of the software changed, you were supposed to > reapply all your patches against the new version. Also, the maintainers > probably requested you to modify your patches based on their input. > They certainly weren't interested in every little edit you made along > the way, only the final result. > > Git "history" rewriting is the modern version of this game. Only, git > automates much of the minutiae to track changes in the base version, > reapply patches, move changes around between commits etc. All this is about the final result of what a branch was supposed to accomplish and I agree with you here. My concerns were with what happens in the branch as long as it is not final. Why throw away its history when pushing? Because it contains silly code its author would be ashamed of? martin