mailing list mirror (one of many)
 help / color / mirror / code / Atom feed
From: Junio C Hamano <>
To: Johannes Schindelin <>
Cc: Johannes Schindelin via GitGitGadget <>,
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] stash: handle pathspec magic again
Date: Sun, 10 Mar 2019 09:56:51 +0900	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <> (Johannes Schindelin's message of "Fri, 8 Mar 2019 17:12:02 +0100 (STD)")

Johannes Schindelin <> writes:

> If you care deeply about the commit history, I hereby offer to you to
> clean up the built-in stash patches when you say you're ready to advance
> them to `master`.

What's the goal of such a rebase?  To rebuild the topic as a
sensible sequence of commits that logically builds on top of
previous steps to ease later bisection and understanding?

Thanks for an offer out of good intentions,, but let's move on and
polish the tree shape at the tip of this topic.  The history behind
it may be messier than other segments of our history, and future
developers may have harder time learning the intention of the topic
when making changes on top, but this one was supposed to create a
bug-to-bug reimplementation of the scripted version.  What matters
more would be our future changes on top of this code, which improves
what we used to have as scripted Porcelain.  They will genuinely be
novel efforts, need to be built in logical order and explainable
steps to help future developers.  Compared to that, so the history
of our stumbling along the way to reach today's tip of the topic
has much lower value.

Besides I think it is way too late for the current topic.  We
established before the topic hit 'next' that reviewers' eyes all
lost freshness and patience to review another round of this series

We at least know that the ordering and organization of the iteration
we see in 'next' is crappy, because some reviewers did look at them.
The rewrite will see no reviews, if any, far fewer and shallower
reviews than the iteration we have; nobody would be able to say with
confidence that the rewritten series achieves its goal of leaving a
sensible history.  Doing so just before it hits 'master' makes it a
sure thing.

Let's just we all admit that we did a poor job when we decided to
push this topic to 'next' before it was ready, and learn the lesson
to avoid haste making waste for the future topics.


  reply	other threads:[~2019-03-10  0:56 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-03-07 15:29 [PATCH 0/2] stash: handle pathspec magic again Johannes Schindelin via GitGitGadget
2019-03-07 15:29 ` [PATCH 1/2] legacy stash: fix "rudimentary backport of -q" Johannes Schindelin via GitGitGadget
2019-03-11  7:27   ` Junio C Hamano
2019-03-07 15:29 ` [PATCH 2/2] built-in stash: handle :(glob) pathspecs again Johannes Schindelin via GitGitGadget
2019-03-11  7:28   ` Junio C Hamano
2019-03-11 16:27     ` Johannes Schindelin
2019-03-11 22:19       ` Thomas Gummerer
2019-03-08  1:37 ` [PATCH 0/2] stash: handle pathspec magic again Junio C Hamano
2019-03-08 16:12   ` Johannes Schindelin
2019-03-10  0:56     ` Junio C Hamano [this message]
2019-03-11 16:25       ` Johannes Schindelin
2019-03-18  4:39         ` Junio C Hamano
2019-03-18  7:02           ` Junio C Hamano

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly 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:

  List information:

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \ \ \ \ \ \

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
Code repositories for project(s) associated with this public inbox

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).