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.bugs Subject: bug#64055: Implementation of modifying VC change comments for Git Date: Mon, 21 Oct 2024 08:39:35 +0300 Message-ID: <86wmi2ggko.fsf@gnu.org> References: <874j59wym3.fsf@melete.silentflame.com> <868qukl73k.fsf@gnu.org> <87bjzfuzaq.fsf@melete.silentflame.com> <96d49abc-888b-4561-b57d-8d85627e2c42@yandex.ru> <87h696kydj.fsf@melete.silentflame.com> Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="11748"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: Morgan.J.Smith@outlook.com, 64055@debbugs.gnu.org, dgutov@yandex.ru To: Sean Whitton Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Mon Oct 21 07:42:55 2024 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@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 1t2lBv-0002wg-83 for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Mon, 21 Oct 2024 07:42:55 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1t2lBh-0002SJ-Sn; Mon, 21 Oct 2024 01:42:42 -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 1t2lBd-0002Ry-Ig for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 21 Oct 2024 01:42:37 -0400 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:5::43]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1t2lBc-0003uH-7U for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 21 Oct 2024 01:42:37 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=debbugs.gnu.org; s=debbugs-gnu-org; h=References:In-Reply-To:From:Date:To:Subject; bh=6viJCZeeCqZAsGN3QHr4dPYSguuP//upplLok7iK33c=; b=iuKMP2e4kgVRp7KuMgumTKPwJ4cwNP81HEYrtMQ53WlCFfjnE0R5PnZjTYlAxih1JdPPzzjkcXbP91ozopi8s2MX3Rw6I/ngy8pWXZH/nM9dbQzNizFp9iExn2ef67ONbv5G7vEI9r3OJkBtgnblqrC2xIXx+EexxD5f6MFTU5Q/CZ1eMaGPFW06wxdGAmYYlnX8V8eAe8fwnuGoeJ8G6cySg/qQ4Tnz06fL93KApbQim+3udmBSU2DNXrSB/d+bkyVgQA7GgJH6gB9ZvlJ3kSvJ9TOjeTkwRbTpvuYA1wUcy2sDoP37G+dQhJcyeTC2ogw1GWpfEvq8PNbtadvhvA==; Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1t2lC1-00056E-Uf for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 21 Oct 2024 01:43:01 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Eli Zaretskii Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Mon, 21 Oct 2024 05:43:01 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 64055 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: patch Original-Received: via spool by 64055-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B64055.172948934819547 (code B ref 64055); Mon, 21 Oct 2024 05:43:01 +0000 Original-Received: (at 64055) by debbugs.gnu.org; 21 Oct 2024 05:42:28 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:49778 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1t2lBU-00055D-4g for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 21 Oct 2024 01:42:28 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:33096) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1t2lBR-00054z-7c for 64055@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 21 Oct 2024 01:42:25 -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 1t2l8m-0003WI-Df; Mon, 21 Oct 2024 01:39:40 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gnu.org; s=fencepost-gnu-org; h=References:Subject:In-Reply-To:To:From:Date: mime-version; bh=6viJCZeeCqZAsGN3QHr4dPYSguuP//upplLok7iK33c=; b=JeQVboODj1xD T6ySKu/PqGo7BWj2XqT8rFlnIUYd58kulBj3uxn2jLX+R5xmgmrsoqTdFSBYYi+KLPLHCB+DxaC1g H2p1IJHJ7R7D7/jBNfcdkIqc/7bTeYd0D7gTo+HNJrK2gI8pG6xs+f7CRBteqImbJsWEFoS0ENqPQ 5JG8natVIpprogPLWBqIGzHNJiTB65Gfhwrpg7uAWjshnB7KiDv3TlRpGVIdnxX/oahRZqTsQ2u9h ripSDJPy8l8cYiu374QpEmd2gDzzRavJ665iF2pUF5CndgWZffad7lNlsy/EI9/r55PD/UcPWp1Ue ilispFf4n6dSQtk7l3bnFw==; In-Reply-To: <87h696kydj.fsf@melete.silentflame.com> (message from Sean Whitton on Mon, 21 Oct 2024 10:01:28 +0800) X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list X-BeenThere: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org List-Id: "Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.bugs:294023 Archived-At: > From: Sean Whitton > Cc: Eli Zaretskii , Morgan.J.Smith@outlook.com, > 64055@debbugs.gnu.org > Date: Mon, 21 Oct 2024 10:01:28 +0800 > > > On 20/10/2024 08:19, Sean Whitton wrote: > >> +*** New user option 'vc-git-allow-rewriting-history'. > >> +Many Git commands can change your copy of published change history > >> +without warning. If VC commands detect that this could happen, they > >> +will stop. You can customize this variable to permit rewriting history > >> +even though Emacs thinks it is dangerous. > > > > Curious: do we consider Git to be different from others? Or would we have > > corresponding options for Hg, Bzr, (maybe) Svn? > > > > If we think rewriting history dangerous for all, we could mark the command as > > 'disabled' instead. > > I think that for some VCS editing the commit message is not a form of > rewriting history in any sense. And we can hope for a future VCS that > keeps change histories for commit messages, so that we might easily > correct our mistakes. So I don't believe it would make sense to just > disable log-view-modify-change-comment. > > We might, though, want to consider a more general > vc-allow-rewriting-history instead of vc-git-allow-rewriting-history, > and use it wherever its applicable -- it will be VCS-dependent where > exactly it applies. > > I'm cautious about doing that without more information, because > "rewriting history" is, in my mind, a Git-specific piece of terminology > to begin with. Which aspects of "rewriting history" you consider Git-specific? I think any dVCS has the same issues with that, and supports similar workflows, so the concept is relevant to all of them.