Rockbox mail archiveSubject: Re: jdgordon: r28078 - trunk/apps/radio
Re: jdgordon: r28078 - trunk/apps/radio
From: Dominik Riebeling <dominik.riebeling_at_gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 15 Sep 2010 19:01:19 +0200
On Wed, Sep 15, 2010 at 6:38 PM, Paul Louden <paulthenerd_at_gmail.com> wrote:
> I guess my question is, do we want to ask people to *try* for useful commit
> messages, or do we want to say "if we can edit them later, anything is
I'm not sure if the latter would happen since changing the commit
message also creates noise (and you basically publish a "I did it
wrong" message, and nobody likes to be wrong, right?).
I'm using git-svn a lot and that allows me to review every change
before actually committing it to the main repository. Basically, my
current workflow usually looks like this:
- create a feature branch
- work, do several commits
- when done, rebase the feature branch, then squash it to a single commit
- review the change, sometimes even on a different branch. Since it's
a single commit I can easily amend the commit message of that commit
until I'm satisfied. It did happen that I amended the commit message
several times until I was satisfied. It even did happen that I noticed
issues with the commit during that phase (like forgotten files for
which using a different branch is quite helpful), so I can fix that.
- dcommit it.
I don't know of any numbers but I'm under the impression that quite a
lot of committers use git-svn (or mirror with another DVCS). And if
you use such a tool I don't see much excuses for making lazy commits.
I for myself tend to rather make a commit the next day than to make a
broken one (though I'm not always sucessful at that).
Received on 2010-09-15