From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: scratch/igc as feature branch Date: Thu, 04 Jul 2024 09:26:32 +0300 Message-ID: <868qyhad0n.fsf@gnu.org> References: <86sewpahi8.fsf@gnu.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="30896"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: acorallo@gnu.org, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Gerd =?utf-8?Q?M=C3=B6llmann?= Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Thu Jul 04 08:28:08 2024 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1sPFwt-0007l7-C0 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Thu, 04 Jul 2024 08:28:07 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1sPFvy-0008E8-36; Thu, 04 Jul 2024 02:27:10 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1sPFvi-00083h-A6 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 04 Jul 2024 02:26:55 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1sPFvh-0003ar-QQ; Thu, 04 Jul 2024 02:26:53 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gnu.org; s=fencepost-gnu-org; h=MIME-version:References:Subject:In-Reply-To:To:From: Date; bh=5x2dbF6p4sr84VvrtBZPqmO2E9ZlYYrVC8P7A44mfHU=; b=Y28Y1GIcAGjdxolWLg+O ZGA0UM6LET6u8fRzpq7dRcGF/24NIPCqZLtPZvl7wdFk4yxsVTT+DkNM3JJF3gIJ51QUo6JMUgIHV lZXBE6IRreMQQkmwfN5Veyr2lc91TunKCwBbuHW6gEQXbiuJW3oT9zIsPnPgAUPIIZEUlQwf22bXx Hq+SIzn9sf852A69lN/8rHTyhIT4uYjDx2k5ABaSXhUw+yPPT3Ks4R9G3UpWbVC/53b1LeQUf+KzP yWrie909L97UnPPQoNQqfUrSKlPb/hzNMTRsp41bMg5Gi7ZgPJfpQqp3UsLkjSotTnsZV2MEzMmka b+RXhvM0A4HTVA==; In-Reply-To: (message from Gerd =?utf-8?Q?M=C3=B6llmann?= on Thu, 04 Jul 2024 08:14:24 +0200) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:321306 Archived-At: > From: Gerd Möllmann > Cc: acorallo@gnu.org, emacs-devel@gnu.org > Date: Thu, 04 Jul 2024 08:14:24 +0200 > > Eli Zaretskii writes: > > > No, we only need to provide a commit log message that describes the > > changes wrt the revision before the merge. For example, a new file or > > a new function that saw gobs of commits on the branch needs only to be > > mentioned as new file or new function. Other places need to be > > mentioned as if all the changes were done in one go, and changes which > > were later reverted don't need to be mentioned at all. > > > > IOW, think about describing the merge "as if" you've rebased the > > branch onto master (I say "as if" because IMO actually rebasing is not > > a good idea). > > Let try me formulate in my own words what I understood, to see it is > right. > > The commits before the merge don't need new new commit messages. So, > there's is no interactive rebasing required. The commit message of the > merge consists of a change log entry describing all effective changes > between master and igc at that time (it describes the diff at that > time. > > Right? Yes. > >> Also, there are probably many hundreds of commits that are not in > >> scratch/igc at all, but only in my original. What's with those? > > > > If they don't affect the code after the merge, they don't need to be > > mentioned in the commit log message. Or did you mean something other > > than commit log messages? > > Well, Andrea talked about the importance of history. And >50% of the > history are not on savannah. I guess I just don't understand what he > means with history which should be preserved or how h expressed it. I believe I answered that in another email.