---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Vincent van Ravesteijn <v...@lyx.org> Date: Fri, May 17, 2013 at 7:47 AM Subject: Re: LyX convention for squash vs. merge/rebase? To: Scott Kostyshak <skost...@lyx.org>
On Fri, May 17, 2013 at 5:11 AM, Scott Kostyshak <skost...@lyx.org> wrote: > On Thu, May 16, 2013 at 8:34 PM, Cyrille Artho <c.ar...@aist.go.jp> wrote: > > Hi Scott, > > IMHO many small commits are almost always a lot better. > > > > "git bisect" can be very useful in tracking down problems when you have > many > > small commits. With a single huge commit, that feature is almost useless. > > > > This benefit alone outweighs the small drawback of having multiple commit > > messages. (If you used meaningful messages during your commits, they in > > themselves can also be helpful.) > > Thanks for your comments Cyrille. I committed the series here: > 0d434033..43d71022 > > I'd still be interested in what others prefer for the future. > In general I like to split up things, especially if it reflects the thought process of a change, or if things get added step-by-step, such that the individual commits are much more comprehensible. But, I am not interested in commits that indicate that someone changed his mind a few times, or that he was forgotten to do something or did it wrong in the first place. For example, a commit like "English tweaks" shouldn't be there in general, but in this case it makes sense because you show what you changed in the original patch of Yihui. A separate thing is that we might want to merge in such a change. That would cause the master branch to have much fewer commits (if you use --first-parent-only). Vincent
