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: Should we have a commit size guideline? (was: builds are getting slower?) Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2015 18:16:36 +0200 Message-ID: <83bn9r3cwr.fsf@gnu.org> References: Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1450196202 31664 80.91.229.3 (15 Dec 2015 16:16:42 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2015 16:16:42 +0000 (UTC) Cc: dak@gnu.org, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: bruce.connor.am@gmail.com Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue Dec 15 17:16:37 2015 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1a8sH8-0000Q8-Sa for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 15 Dec 2015 17:16:31 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:37783 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1a8sH8-0002IU-1r for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 15 Dec 2015 11:16:30 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:38887) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1a8sH4-0002IL-U1 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 15 Dec 2015 11:16:27 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1a8sGz-0002VV-OF for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 15 Dec 2015 11:16:26 -0500 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::e]:56495) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1a8sGz-0002VP-Kw; Tue, 15 Dec 2015 11:16:21 -0500 Original-Received: from 84.94.185.246.cable.012.net.il ([84.94.185.246]:2899 helo=HOME-C4E4A596F7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:128) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1a8sGy-0002kI-Sf; Tue, 15 Dec 2015 11:16:21 -0500 In-reply-to: (message from Artur Malabarba on Tue, 15 Dec 2015 13:48:28 +0000) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 2001:4830:134:3::e X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 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-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:196313 Archived-At: > Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2015 13:48:28 +0000 > From: Artur Malabarba > Cc: emacs-devel > > > This is a very, very large commit. It should have been split into > > multiple commits addressing separate issues. > > When commiting changes, I usually group them into the smallest > possible commits while still leaving everything in a consistent state > (i.e., not defining a function that's only used in later commits, not > changing a function without making the necessary changes in other > places that call this function). I find that this helps with both > git-bisect and git-revert. > > If we have a different policy (maybe we should) I'm happy to adhere. I generally prefer to see the commits in one go, rather than split. It makes it easier for me to review it.