Re: git bikeshedding (Re: triggers in dpkg, and dpkg maintenance)
On Mon, 25 Feb 2008, Pierre Habouzit wrote:
> > I vote for clean history and a bissectable tree, and I think it is worth the
> > effort. But I am no dpkg developer, this is a thing you guys have to find
> > an agreement among yourselves.
> You vote for the mad route. Sorry, but it makes absolutely no sense to
> me. Ian's work was done at some point, tested from that point, and it
> makes sense to remember that fact. Actually it's insane to forget that
> fact. And rebasing is just pretending that fact never existed. It's just
Let me put this straight. I don't want Ian to rebase for the sake of
rebasing. I have no problem with merging clean branches.
But his branch is not clean:
It starts with two very big commits touching almost all files
and is followed by many small commits which have ubuntu changelog entries
as commit log (and thus the "summary line" is useless).
It also contains invalid email address in some "Author" fields.
I wanted him to present the history in a way that makes sense to
proof-readers and anyone else working on dpkg.
Had he developed his branch with care to have something reviewable, I
would have zero problem merging his branch without requiring a rebase.
Le best-seller français mis à jour pour Debian Etch :