On Thu, Dec 13, 2012 at 6:48 PM, R. David Murray <rdmur...@bitdance.com> wrote: > On Thu, 13 Dec 2012 20:21:24 -0500, Trent Nelson <tr...@snakebite.org> wrote: >> - Use a completely separate clone to house all the intermediate >> commits, then generate a diff once the final commit is ready, >> then apply that diff to the main cpython repo, then push that. >> This approach is fine, but it seems counter-intuitive to the >> whole concept of DVCS. > > Perhaps. But that's exactly what I did with the email package changes > for 3.3. > > You seem to have a tension between "all those dirty little commits" and > "clean history" and the fact that a dvcs is designed to preserve all > those commits...if you don't want those intermediate commits in the > official repo, then why is a diff/patch a bad way to achieve that?
Right. And you usually have to do this beforehand anyways to upload your changes to the tracker for review. Also, for the record (not that anyone has said anything to the contrary), our dev guide says, "You should collapse changesets of a single feature or bugfix before pushing the result to the main repository. The reason is that we don’t want the history to be full of intermediate commits recording the private history of the person working on a patch. If you are using the rebase extension, consider adding the --collapse option to hg rebase. The collapse extension is another choice." (from http://docs.python.org/devguide/committing.html#working-with-mercurial ) --Chris _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
