From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Stephen Leake Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: git history tracking across renames (and emacs support) Date: Wed, 03 Jan 2018 10:42:02 -0600 Message-ID: <86bmia7v39.fsf@stephe-leake.org> References: <87a7yn7tqp.fsf@lifelogs.com> <878te75xa1.fsf@lifelogs.com> <87ind6l2tt.fsf@lifelogs.com> <877etklvsa.fsf@lifelogs.com> <83y3m0pv8u.fsf@gnu.org> <86608msw0h.fsf@dod.no> <838tdiet25.fsf@gnu.org> <87y3li4vh7.fsf@telefonica.net> <87efnan46u.fsf@linux-m68k.org> <86wp12qtgo.fsf@dod.no> <83tvw6chqv.fsf@gnu.org> <86shbprix7.fsf_-_@dod.no> <83608kck4c.fsf@gnu.org> <544c170f-99bd-c701-3063-c697296a30a6@cs.ucla.edu> NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1514997732 32532 195.159.176.226 (3 Jan 2018 16:42:12 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 3 Jan 2018 16:42:12 +0000 (UTC) User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/26.0.90 (windows-nt) To: emacs-devel Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Jan 03 17:42:08 2018 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 1eWm7D-000809-4N for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 03 Jan 2018 17:42:07 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:57570 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1eWm9A-0007rl-Ch for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 03 Jan 2018 11:44:08 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:57093) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1eWm7K-0006BD-JJ for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 03 Jan 2018 11:42:15 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1eWm7F-0007rZ-OR for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 03 Jan 2018 11:42:14 -0500 Original-Received: from smtp65.ord1d.emailsrvr.com ([184.106.54.65]:45001) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1eWm7F-0007qf-K3 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 03 Jan 2018 11:42:09 -0500 Original-Received: from smtp9.relay.ord1d.emailsrvr.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp9.relay.ord1d.emailsrvr.com (SMTP Server) with ESMTP id 4852FC009D for ; Wed, 3 Jan 2018 11:42:05 -0500 (EST) X-Auth-ID: board-president@tomahawk-creek-hoa.com Original-Received: by smtp9.relay.ord1d.emailsrvr.com (Authenticated sender: board-president-AT-tomahawk-creek-hoa.com) with ESMTPSA id 0C641C0095 for ; Wed, 3 Jan 2018 11:42:04 -0500 (EST) X-Sender-Id: board-president@tomahawk-creek-hoa.com Original-Received: from Takver4 (76-218-37-33.lightspeed.kscymo.sbcglobal.net [76.218.37.33]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AES256-GCM-SHA384) by 0.0.0.0:25 (trex/5.7.12); Wed, 03 Jan 2018 11:42:05 -0500 In-Reply-To: <544c170f-99bd-c701-3063-c697296a30a6@cs.ucla.edu> (Paul Eggert's message of "Tue, 2 Jan 2018 18:50:06 -0800") X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 3.x [fuzzy] X-Received-From: 184.106.54.65 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:221554 Archived-At: Paul Eggert writes: > Eli Zaretskii wrote: > >> . the first priority should be to leave the explanation as comments >> in the code, if that is feasible, because then the commit explains >> itself, and the information is also available during simple code >> reading unrelated to VCS history searching; > Yes, that is preferable if it makes sense in the new code. However, it > often doesn't make sense. For example, when deleting a file one > typically does not want to leave a message behind where the file used > to be, saying "this file was deleted", as that would just slow down > later maintainers who normally shouldn't be burdened with the detritus > of older versions. Yes, but for design decisions, it is useful to keep comments that say "an alternative design ... was rejected because ..." so when some bright newbie suggests the alternative, they are easily detered (or forced to make it even better). Sometimes these comments belong in the elisp manual. -- -- Stephe