From: Junio C Hamano <firstname.lastname@example.org> To: Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de> Cc: Johannes Schindelin via GitGitGadget <email@example.com>, firstname.lastname@example.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] stash: handle pathspec magic again Date: Sun, 10 Mar 2019 09:56:51 +0900 [thread overview] Message-ID: <email@example.com> (raw) In-Reply-To: <nycvar.QRO.firstname.lastname@example.org> (Johannes Schindelin's message of "Fri, 8 Mar 2019 17:12:02 +0100 (STD)") Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de> 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 adequately. 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. Thanks.
next prev parent 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 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: 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 \ --subject='Re: [PATCH 0/2] stash: handle pathspec magic again' \ /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
email@example.com list mirror (unofficial, one of many) This inbox may be cloned and mirrored by anyone: 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 # If you have public-inbox 1.1+ installed, you may # initialize and index your mirror using the following commands: public-inbox-init -V1 git git/ https://public-inbox.org/git \ firstname.lastname@example.org public-inbox-index git Example config snippet for mirrors. Newsgroups are available over NNTP: nntp://news.public-inbox.org/inbox.comp.version-control.git nntp://7fh6tueqddpjyxjmgtdiueylzoqt6pt7hec3pukyptlmohoowvhde4yd.onion/inbox.comp.version-control.git nntp://ie5yzdi7fg72h7s4sdcztq5evakq23rdt33mfyfcddc5u3ndnw24ogqd.onion/inbox.comp.version-control.git nntp://4uok3hntl7oi7b4uf4rtfwefqeexfzil2w6kgk2jn5z2f764irre7byd.onion/inbox.comp.version-control.git nntp://news.gmane.io/gmane.comp.version-control.git note: .onion URLs require Tor: https://www.torproject.org/ code repositories for project(s) associated with this inbox: https://80x24.org/mirrors/git.git AGPL code for this site: git clone https://public-inbox.org/public-inbox.git