[squeak-dev] The Inbox: PreferenceBrowser-ck.85.mcz

Frank Shearar frank.shearar at gmail.com
Thu Dec 19 16:37:56 UTC 2019


Chris wants a clean history with _meaningful_ chunks of changes.
Other people want commits to be discrete/isolated changes, where "fixing
typos" is one kind of change. (*)
Everyone wants an efficient version control system.

Also: code is easy to change, while people are very hard to change.

Wikis have handled this for decades with a "minor edit" flag. (PhpWiki
certainly had it in the last century.)

If Monticello commits had such a concept, Chris could say "please don't
show me dust" and other reviewers could demand "separate out the typo fixes
from the interesting changes". I'm sure there are interesting technical
discussions to be had, but my meta-point is this: quit arguing about
process and invest in the tools and everyone can get what they want.

frank

(*)  I'm in this camp: refactors, behaviour changes, typo fixes should be
in separate chunks, because I spend too much time reviewing code. At work I
have the privilege of rejecting commits that don't meet these rules, and
I'm not shy in using that privilege. And I encourage my staff to do the
same.

On Thu, 19 Dec 2019 at 02:56, Tobias Pape <Das.Linux at gmx.de> wrote:

> Christian
>
> > On 18.12.2019, at 22:58, Christian Kellermann <ckeen at pestilenz.org>
> wrote:
> >
> > * Chris Muller <asqueaker at gmail.com> [191218 22:45]:
> >> Please don't put this dust into the trunk ancestry.  Does anyone have
> >> anything else for the PreferencesBrowser they could include this with..?
> >
> > I am sorry, how should I deal with these mini things in the future?
>
> Like you did. I think it's a perfectly valid commit. :)
>
> Best regards
>         -Tobias
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/squeak-dev/attachments/20191219/b3334d72/attachment.html>


More information about the Squeak-dev mailing list