On Sun, Dec 30, 2012 at 12:09 AM, Michael Richter <ttmrich...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 30 December 2012 14:00, Nico Williams <n...@cryptonector.com> wrote:
>> Because they want clean history.
>
>
> This is precisely why I maintain that you're not going to see a "rebase" in
> Fossil. Quoting from
> http://www.mail-archive.com/fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org/msg01792.html:
>
> There are differing philosophies here. Some say it is important to
> present a clean, linear narrative of what took place - a narrative
> that is easy to follow and easy to understand. Others say that it is
> more important to present history as it actually occurred, in all its
> messy detail, not how you wish it had occurred. Git and Hg tend more
> toward the first view whereas Fossil leans toward the second.
There's room for interpretation, and for persuasion.
Clearly the history in an official repo must reflect what happened.
But the history I choose to present in a contribution is entirely in
my hands to decide how it looks (and the upstream may impose their own
requirements). If it wasn't in the official repos, did it happen?
Fossil didn't always have private branched. It does now. Isn't that
a concession that sets precedent?
At Sun, for example, we had official repos for products ("gates"),
project repos aiming at eventual integration into product gates, and
individual repos. Individuals pushed to either project gates or
product gates, depending on what they were working on. Product gates
were always archived and available, even for ancient releases of the
products. Project gates were generally (but not always) archived and
available. Individual repos were generally littered across the place,
with no real way for one to find them without asking the developer
working on them. History was cleaned prior to pushing to gates higher
up the hierarchy, but past history in product gates was never
rewritten. This worked spectacularly well. Who wants to see typos
made and fixed before the commits landed on the product gates??
Answer: no one, because such things are useless and a burden.
The room I see for interpretation and/or persuasion lies in that not
all history is equally valuable.
Nico
--
_______________________________________________
fossil-users mailing list
fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org
http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
