Odd instructions for Git?
Hi, I was reading http://live.gnome.org/TranslationProject/GitHowTo and noticed that it says It is customary in Git to go for small commits; if you have more than one file, commit them separately, with a descriptive commit message for each commit. For example, if you edit the Makefile.am file for DOC_LINGUAS or the LINGUAS file, it is good to commit the as However for me this sounds like contradicting very basic rule of version control usage that each commit should contain all logically relevant changes together. For example when committing initial translation, I think only sane solution is to commit first version of po file together with Makefile/LINGUAS change, because those belong logically together. However now Wiki instructs to work in different way. Are we really changing this kind of conventions to adhere some strange Git customs? -- Tommi Vainikainen ___ gnome-i18n mailing list gnome-i18n@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-i18n
Re: Odd instructions for Git?
On Sat, Apr 4, 2009 at 8:27 PM, Tommi Vainikainen tvain...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, I was reading http://live.gnome.org/TranslationProject/GitHowTo and noticed that it says It is customary in Git to go for small commits; if you have more than one file, commit them separately, with a descriptive commit message for each commit. For example, if you edit the Makefile.am file for DOC_LINGUAS or the LINGUAS file, it is good to commit the as However for me this sounds like contradicting very basic rule of version control usage that each commit should contain all logically relevant changes together. For example when committing initial translation, I think only sane solution is to commit first version of po file together with Makefile/LINGUAS change, because those belong logically together. However now Wiki instructs to work in different way. Are we really changing this kind of conventions to adhere some strange Git customs? Considering that in git it will be OK to write one-line commit messages (ChangeLog file is not necessary), I think it is better to have git commit Makefile.am -m Added LL to DOC_LINGUAS git commit LL.po -m Added LL translation git commit LL/figures/*.png -m Added screenshots instead of git commit Makefile.am LL.po LL/figures/*.png -m Added LL to DOC_LINGUAS, added LL translation and screenshots or even git commit -a -m Added LL to DOC_LINGUAS, added LL translation and screenshots There is a limit for the commit message of 72 characters so that changelog summaries will appear neat. These are my own suggestions and are open to debate. I think it is good to have this discussion (or any git discussion) on the list, since the switch to git will take place in a few weeks. Regards, Simos ___ gnome-i18n mailing list gnome-i18n@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-i18n
Re: Odd instructions for Git?
2009/4/4 Simos simos.li...@googlemail.com: Considering that in git it will be OK to write one-line commit messages (ChangeLog file is not necessary), I think it is better to have git commit Makefile.am -m Added LL to DOC_LINGUAS git commit LL.po -m Added LL translation git commit LL/figures/*.png -m Added screenshots Hmmm, I was sure the move to a DVCS was planned to make life easier Maybe bzr can handle this case better?? :D ___ gnome-i18n mailing list gnome-i18n@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-i18n
Re: Odd instructions for Git?
Le samedi 04 avril 2009 à 21:41 +0100, Simos a écrit : On Sat, Apr 4, 2009 at 8:27 PM, Tommi Vainikainen tvain...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, I was reading http://live.gnome.org/TranslationProject/GitHowTo and noticed that it says It is customary in Git to go for small commits; if you have more than one file, commit them separately, with a descriptive commit message for each commit. For example, if you edit the Makefile.am file for DOC_LINGUAS or the LINGUAS file, it is good to commit the as However for me this sounds like contradicting very basic rule of version control usage that each commit should contain all logically relevant changes together. For example when committing initial translation, I think only sane solution is to commit first version of po file together with Makefile/LINGUAS change, because those belong logically together. However now Wiki instructs to work in different way. Are we really changing this kind of conventions to adhere some strange Git customs? Considering that in git it will be OK to write one-line commit messages (ChangeLog file is not necessary), I think it is better to have git commit Makefile.am -m Added LL to DOC_LINGUAS git commit LL.po -m Added LL translation git commit LL/figures/*.png -m Added screenshots instead of git commit Makefile.am LL.po LL/figures/*.png -m Added LL to DOC_LINGUAS, added LL translation and screenshots or even git commit -a -m Added LL to DOC_LINGUAS, added LL translation and screenshots There is a limit for the commit message of 72 characters so that changelog summaries will appear neat. These are my own suggestions and are open to debate. No, commits should always contain all files containing logically related modifications. Committing the Makefile.am modification without the corresponding po has no sense. In your example, I would commit it as: git commit Makefile.am LL.po LL/figures/*.png Then an editor will appear, and the commit message should contain one short description line, and possibly a longer description on a second paragraph: Added LL help translation LL added to DOC_LINGUAS, screenshots added in figures, ... However, in this case I think the short description is enough. People aren't stupid and they can easily figure out what happened and why files has been added/modified through consulting the logs/diffs. Claude ___ gnome-i18n mailing list gnome-i18n@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-i18n
Re: Odd instructions for Git?
On Sat, Apr 4, 2009 at 10:31 PM, Stéphane Raimbault stephane.raimba...@gmail.com wrote: 2009/4/4 Claude Paroz cla...@2xlibre.net: No, commits should always contain all files containing logically related modifications. Committing the Makefile.am modification without the corresponding po has no sense. In your example, I would commit it as: git commit Makefile.am LL.po LL/figures/*.png Then an editor will appear, and the commit message should contain one short description line, and possibly a longer description on a second paragraph: Added LL help translation LL added to DOC_LINGUAS, screenshots added in figures, ... However, in this case I think the short description is enough. People aren't stupid and they can easily figure out what happened and why files has been added/modified through consulting the logs/diffs. Yes, a commit must always be atomic (and so be easy to review or revert) and it's true for any VCS/DVCS able to handle changeset (SVN, git, hg, bzr, monotone, etc). Simos, please, could you revert this part in the wiki? Hi Stéphane, Feel free to make the correction as you see suitable. Cheers, Simos ___ gnome-i18n mailing list gnome-i18n@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-i18n
