couchdb-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Dale Harvey <d...@arandomurl.com>
Subject Re: [PROPOSAL] tag our commits
Date Wed, 04 Dec 2013 16:52:23 GMT
Also a reasonably weak -1, atomic updates to tests / docs / code is a good
thing, the tags are pretty much always inconsistent, they arent actually
useful for anything and additional steps are just another barrier

I have been asking people to avoid it on any codebases I review for


On 4 December 2013 16:47, Noah Slater <nslater@apache.org> wrote:

> Jason makes a compelling argument.
>
> Let's say you do three commits on a feature branch:
>
> [code] Add foo widget to core
> [tests] Add tests for foo widget
> [docs] Add docs for foo widget
>
> What do you then use as a commit message when you squash and merge into
> master?
>
> And let's say we want to accept a pull request on Github that adds foo
> atomically. Are we really going to send the person away and ask them
> to decompose the commit into many commits, each one with a tag?
>
> I think I've convinced myself that this should, at the most, be optional.
>
> On 4 December 2013 17:42, Jason Smith <jhs@apache.org> wrote:
> > While I'm whining about tags:
> >
> > Tagging is most useful by having multiple tags per target. My blog post
> can
> > be tagged [vacation] [swaziland] [photos] [family], and then later I can
> > find all posts about family.
> >
> > Git messages are forced to one tag. That's unhelpful because commits
> > ideally update code, tests, and documentation. A useful tag might be [ui]
> > but I could get the same thing by looking at the history of src/fauxton/.
> >
> > It is marginally useful at a very dear cost: 4-10 characters per commit
> > message.
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Dec 4, 2013 at 11:24 PM, Jason Smith <jhs@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> >> -1
> >>
> >> We do this at Nodejitsu and I find it tedious and unhelpful. It's a bit
> of
> >> ceremony with little benefit. For me at least, I never want to see "only
> >> [foo] commits" I want to see "only commits in subdirectory foo/".
> Otherwise
> >> I see the commits through `git blame`.
> >>
> >> That's my opinion, but I am comfortable being overruled.
> >>
> >>
> >> On Sun, Oct 27, 2013 at 8:28 PM, Benoit Chesneau <bchesneau@gmail.com
> >wrote:
> >>
> >>> Hi all,
> >>>
> >>> I would like to propose that we start to tag our commits. The
> reasonning
> >>> behind that is to distinct easily the changes concerning  the doc, the
> ui
> >>> and the core and filter them immediately and force us to make a change
> >>> atomic. So I would like to propose that we tag the commit line with
> >>>
> >>> [DOC]
> >>> [UI]
> >>> [CORE]
> >>>
> >>> other ? Another way to distinct the changes would also be to have all
> of
> >>> these as subprojects eventually but it may require too much changes.
> >>>
> >>> Thoughts?
> >>>
> >>> - benoit
> >>>
> >>
> >>
>
>
>
> --
> Noah Slater
> https://twitter.com/nslater
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message