> > I think Dave's new "Reparent" button is the best go-to right now.
> > That way, we can have the cowboy-style dev process want and then
> > "squash" out the interim versions into one pretty version that
> > concisely describes the final product.
>
> I am replying here because my name was mentioned. I previously explained
> my use case for the "Reparent" button:
>
>   http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/squeak-dev/2018-November/200556.html
>
> I did not intend it as a tool to encourage modifications to the
> trunk update stream, and I do not support using it for that purpose.

The bottom line is you agree to it when it suits a purpose.

I feel exactly the same way.

> I have previously said, and I will repeat it here, that I agree
> with Marcel and others that the version history in trunk must be
> considered write-only. It should be modified only the case of an
> emergency situation in which the update stream is broken. Period.

I don't know if this is a rule designed to increase freedom, or
posturing, but it isn't necessary.  Not only because I'm willing to
bend over backward to work with you, but because if something is
unsustainable, it won't care whether you're able to enforce it or not.
Sooner or later, you'll have to change something.  Since none of us
really enjoys thinking or talking about this, isn't "later" better?

I think it's in our best interests to think of the trunk ancestry as a
selection of improvements and "tell the story" well, instead of
relegating it to be a unsustainable recording device.  How we get it
to be that doesn't need to be artificially restricted, we are free to
develop however we want.  It's not "rewriting history" if it's only
5-minutes old, okay?

> p.s. "Shoot from the hip" and "cowboy <whatever>" are American
> English vernacular based on our cultural mythologies. They imply
> both positive and negative things. The positive is "follow your
> instincts and make great things happen". The negative implies
> following uncontrolled instincts with unpredictable outcomes. Some
> people would consider "cowboy-style" to be a compliment, and others
> might consider it an insult. It is usually a little of both.

It's a succint and correct way to state the trade-off between
conservative vs. loose, but nothing to do with "insults" (unless you
don't like cowboys, I guess..).

> We also have the phrase "straight shooter" which means "realiable,
> trustworthy, honest and straighforward", ...

Where I come from, it means "they mean what they say" and "say what
they mean" .  I'm definitely that.

Regards,
  Chris