From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.9 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6 Received: from out1.vger.email (out1.vger.email [IPv6:2620:137:e000::1:20]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 242241F41C for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2023 22:28:19 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: dcvr.yhbt.net; dkim=pass (2048-bit key; unprotected) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=20210112 header.b=VndRQNHJ; dkim-atps=neutral Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S229456AbjC0W0B (ORCPT ); Mon, 27 Mar 2023 18:26:01 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:33192 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S231716AbjC0WZ4 (ORCPT ); Mon, 27 Mar 2023 18:25:56 -0400 Received: from mail-pl1-x62e.google.com (mail-pl1-x62e.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::62e]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0422B3A82 for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2023 15:25:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-pl1-x62e.google.com with SMTP id o2so9880083plg.4 for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2023 15:25:53 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; t=1679955953; h=mime-version:user-agent:message-id:date:references:subject:cc:to :from:sender:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=t+BGlfRExkXM7FDQmmRERF/pngXd/pVZ2Qnf5I8QfVI=; b=VndRQNHJ5mV9RRENWHeAx8u1NZWOSV3DBBWUQ2dxdqU+/OKOlO6CwGGUgvVF4NjpB2 Y2qvPNICS8sJ55c8yCQnWvA+fDKc/hDK2DH8o3x3WTiK2hRsV9mskOQXNoFQPUwSK/dt cbpnamjIHechni5et6m2K1FzgO5BAjg7zdegSbdqVcRhO8BEmSmRYpr9Yo3Vkd/PbxPf geOXaWgAH1f000NMqdv/FDTKnkK5noeG6JGXALDFQIuFYRw2nt9DEowlxRSSbFcPC3SX eM6vSiKYqHnQBtlR4KJZw6+Cdcsxc/v9kTzVZ8KUH6fhu0S0Yf673UfofXNHal7+/AjI 8M/Q== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; t=1679955953; h=mime-version:user-agent:message-id:date:references:subject:cc:to :from:sender:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id :reply-to; bh=t+BGlfRExkXM7FDQmmRERF/pngXd/pVZ2Qnf5I8QfVI=; b=krb0Zf6Q/VJiNrW//MYxjUEBBKZg/NOhN2D4sVydpuXnPp/NjHelwB4eKQ86312J9A OGXI/l05iVcg8lpF4dUsBqwwA2g0u0GNq5WSdGmnh44iOOuQhsgvou7E83rur0f68C63 x3JeF+q9D/6SWE5KIo2RQX23b/Vjj11dS0zB8v4r+Ely0yPQfuvNHNW1MyOZ/vDhbrCH 4MFYZbFpZZSXlmS22QCK99vEBIXTg3Na8+J7iyEapF+rMH8EdANG2uwIoVb4lulyYQcC lTpS1Jtu/9NRdC7kXPX/IbcET/uUKi93UaavthlbV0rIZockdiyyBSSCl6dQ4/Gbnv2s ZJRw== X-Gm-Message-State: AAQBX9dtmqdwr8RVhGg5Rw/BrsfjrDwUSC0JLfADqEyL1RsCWSRvOLPf IldRUNqcm2WwiQZ+dWQDUgmm1vcx55E= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AKy350bAzjmSgpyLbDoWJqYCiQMSbW3oX0HzyghHRuS2n2OYC8UNZufM6uQ7WYGCIeBojTQSERy+Ew== X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:ced0:b0:19e:7a2c:78a7 with SMTP id d16-20020a170902ced000b0019e7a2c78a7mr15126280plg.57.1679955953194; Mon, 27 Mar 2023 15:25:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (83.92.168.34.bc.googleusercontent.com. [34.168.92.83]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id q3-20020a170902a3c300b0019ef86c2574sm19651873plb.270.2023.03.27.15.25.52 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Mon, 27 Mar 2023 15:25:52 -0700 (PDT) Sender: Junio C Hamano From: Junio C Hamano To: "Kristoffer Haugsbakk" Cc: "Oswald Buddenhagen" , git@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] sequencer: beautify subject of reverts of reverts References: <20230323162234.995465-1-oswald.buddenhagen@gmx.de> <210376fb-f830-4883-b576-2936dabc09cc@app.fastmail.com> Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2023 15:25:52 -0700 Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/28.2 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org "Kristoffer Haugsbakk" writes: > On Thu, Mar 23, 2023, at 17:22, Oswald Buddenhagen wrote: >> Instead of generating a silly-looking `Revert "Revert "foo""`, make it >> `Reapply "foo"`. > > Nice addition. > > $ echo change >> README.md > $ ./bin-wrappers/git add README.md > $ ./bin-wrappers/git commit -m 'A change' > $ ./bin-wrappers/git revert --no-edit @ > $ ./bin-wrappers/git revert --no-edit @ > $ ./bin-wrappers/git log --oneline master.. > adfce56c6a (HEAD -> reapply) Reapply "A change" > 395894c2ce Revert "A change" > a01e3d6b3d A change > 058643b69f sequencer: beautify subject of reverts of reverts I think Oswald saw the end of a thread a few years ago that discussed a similar idea and the patch is a continuation of that thread, but what should happen when the re-application turns out to be bad? The significance of the act of reverting such a reapplication to the project would be different from the initial revert (where "yikes, the change introduces a regression---let's revert to the state before the change, regroup, and see what we should do" was the motivation). Somebody thought that it now was OK to reintroduce the change, presumably because the code paths around it now have become ready for it and the phrase "Reapply" makes a perfect sense to describe it ("Revert an earlier revert" is not too bad, either, though). But then it turns out it still was a bad idea. Should we say Revert Reapply "A change" Next time somebody thinks the code paths around there are finally ready, do they do Reapply Reapply "A change" or something else? That may be shorter, but even more cryptic than 'Revert Revert Revert Revert "A change"'---"Revert^4 "A change"" the other thread proposed start to look less horrible. So, I dunno.