David Deutsch wrote: > So you're saying a clean commit history is more important than giving me > proper credit where it is due? Again, that is not acceptable. Besides - why > is the commit history that important to begin with?
I have to agree with Alec here. Commit history is important for us and so are proper commit messages. I want to be able to find out who wrote a particular line of code and why it is like it is. That includes tracking changes (preferably with ticket numbers in the commit message) to find the reason why I better do not change that or what circumstances are to consider when changing something. That's the reason why I initially wasn't really keen on code refactoring because it doesn't change the functionality but bloats the history. Of course the arguments for cleaning up the code are strong enough to sacrifice that history let's still try to minimize it. Preferably we want one single commit per PR that says "Code cleanup by David Deutsch" or something. I know that there'll be more but what we currently have in the pending PRs of yours is rather messy and not helpful. I admit that's primarily because of all the discussions we had to reach the agreement which we now have and I also understand that other PRs will be way shorter. It's definitely not about not wanting to give you the credits you deserve for all your hard work, please don't get us wrong on this. If you have other propositions how we can credit your work, please let us know. But still I kindly request you to re-create the pull requests with one commit per processing step (as proposed in [1]) and with descriptive commit messages. Kind regards, Thomas [1] https://gist.github.com/daviddeutsch/6376013 _______________________________________________ Roundcube Development discussion mailing list [email protected] http://lists.roundcube.net/mailman/listinfo/dev
