From: Junio C Hamano <email@example.com> To: Stefan Beller <firstname.lastname@example.org> Cc: Eric Sunshine <email@example.com>, Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de>, git <firstname.lastname@example.org> Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/6] git-submodule.sh: convert part of cmd_update to C Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2018 12:51:58 -0700 Message-ID: <email@example.com> (raw) In-Reply-To: <CAGZ79kZtrmjODGi1j-HRbchZYuALHnms22=wWBV1AF+zUBru_g@mail.gmail.com> Stefan Beller <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes: > Actually I thought it was really cool, i.e. when using your queued branch > instead of my last sent branch, I can see any edits *you* did > (including fixing up typos or applying at slightly different bases). Absolutely. I did not say that there needs a mode to ignore log message. > The sign offs are a bit unfortunate as they are repetitive. > I have two conflicting points of view on that: > > (A) This sign off is inherent to the workflow. So we could > change the workflow, i.e. you pull series instead of applying them. > I think this "more in git, less in email" workflow would find supporters, > such as DScho (cc'd). Sign-off is inherent to the project, in the sense that we want to see how the change flowed recorded in the commits. With a pull-request based workflow, until Git is somehow improved so that a "pull" becomes "fetch and rebase what got fetched on top of my stuff, and add my sign-off while at it" (which is the opposite of the usual "pull --rebase"), we would lose the ability to fully "use" Git to run this project, as we would lose most sign-offs, unlike the e-mail based workflow, which we can use Git fully to have it do its job of recording necessary information. And much more importantly, when "pull-request" based workflow is improved enough so that your original without my sign-off (and you shouldn't, unless you are relaying my changes) becomes what I pulled, which does have my sign-off, range-diff that compares both histories does need to deal with a pair of commits with only one side having a sign-off. So switching the tool is not a proper solution to work around the "sign-off noise" we observed. One side having a sign-off while the other side does not is inherent to what we actively want, and you are letting your tail wag your dog by suggesting to discard it, which is disappointing. > The other (2) downside is that everyone else (authors, reviewers) have > to adapt as well. For authors this might be easy to adapt (push instead > of sending email sounds like a win). As I most often edit the log message and material below three-dash lines (long) _after_ format-patch produced files, I do not think it is a win to force me to push and ask to pull. > (B) The other point of view that I can offer is that we teach range-diff > to ignore certain patterns. Maybe in combination with interpret-trailers > this can be an easy configurable thing, or even a default to ignore > all sign offs? That indicates the same direction as I alluded to in the message you are responding to, I guess, which is a good thing.
next prev parent reply index Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2018-07-17 0:26 Stefan Beller 2018-07-17 0:26 ` [PATCH v2 1/6] git-submodule.sh: align error reporting for update mode to use path Stefan Beller 2018-07-17 0:26 ` [PATCH v2 2/6] git-submodule.sh: rename unused variables Stefan Beller 2018-07-17 0:26 ` [PATCH v2 3/6] builtin/submodule--helper: factor out submodule updating Stefan Beller 2018-07-17 0:26 ` [PATCH v2 4/6] builtin/submodule--helper: store update_clone information in a struct Stefan Beller 2018-07-17 0:26 ` [PATCH v2 5/6] builtin/submodule--helper: factor out method to update a single submodule Stefan Beller 2018-07-17 0:26 ` [PATCH v2 6/6] submodule--helper: introduce new update-module-mode helper Stefan Beller 2018-07-17 7:59 ` SZEDER Gábor 2018-07-17 21:44 ` Junio C Hamano 2018-07-17 18:39 ` [PATCH v2 0/6] git-submodule.sh: convert part of cmd_update to C Junio C Hamano 2018-07-17 18:53 ` Stefan Beller 2018-07-17 18:59 ` Eric Sunshine 2018-07-18 19:34 ` Stefan Beller 2018-07-18 19:55 ` Eric Sunshine 2018-07-18 21:57 ` Junio C Hamano 2018-07-17 19:51 ` Junio C Hamano [this message] 2018-07-17 20:56 ` Stefan Beller 2018-07-17 21:39 ` Junio C Hamano 2018-07-26 10:47 ` Johannes Schindelin 2018-07-26 18:14 ` Stefan Beller
Reply instructions: You may reply publically to this message via plain-text email using any one of the following methods: * Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client, and reply-to-all from there: mbox Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style List information: http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html * Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to switches of git-send-email(1): git send-email \ --email@example.com \ --firstname.lastname@example.org \ --cc=Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de \ --email@example.com \ --firstname.lastname@example.org \ --email@example.com \ /path/to/YOUR_REPLY https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html * If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
firstname.lastname@example.org list mirror (unofficial, one of many) Archives are clonable: git clone --mirror https://public-inbox.org/git git clone --mirror http://ou63pmih66umazou.onion/git git clone --mirror http://czquwvybam4bgbro.onion/git git clone --mirror http://hjrcffqmbrq6wope.onion/git Newsgroups are available over NNTP: nntp://news.public-inbox.org/inbox.comp.version-control.git nntp://ou63pmih66umazou.onion/inbox.comp.version-control.git nntp://czquwvybam4bgbro.onion/inbox.comp.version-control.git nntp://hjrcffqmbrq6wope.onion/inbox.comp.version-control.git nntp://news.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.git note: .onion URLs require Tor: https://www.torproject.org/ or Tor2web: https://www.tor2web.org/ AGPL code for this site: git clone https://public-inbox.org/ public-inbox