Re: [Scons-dev] Fwd: [Bitbucket] Pull request #119: Major revamp of the D language support (scons/scons)
Hi there, On 19.03.2014 15:08, Gary Oberbrunner wrote: This is worth reading, IMHO. From Martin Geisler. You can see more in the pull request (which has been withdrawn, so you won't see it by browsing open PRs on bitbucket), where he explains why pulling Russel's change causes an explosion of branchiness due to mercurial's changeset ordering. I took the time to read through the comments for this pull request, and now would like to share my first impression with you all. The merge graph may look a bit unusual, but this is simply the first time that a long-lived dev branch gets back onto default. I, personally, wouldn't feel the itch to do anything about it. Let graphs get messy and ugly, but this is what happens when you actually work with a VCS. Polishing, folding and rebasing commits only to make the history look pretty is not really required from my side...but let me stress this again, it's just my personal opinion. I really acknowledge and appreciate all the work that Russel, Gary and Martin have put into this. If you like a clean history better, fine...just continue. Especially if this removes your obvious doubts about whether Mercurial did the right thing (This merge looks mixed up, it can't be right.). But you don't have to do it for me. ;) Best regards, Dirk P.S.: Just as an addendum, trying to provide an explanation for what I wrote above...I see worse things every day, we're using ClearCase at work. ;) ___ Scons-dev mailing list Scons-dev@scons.org http://two.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/scons-dev
Re: [Scons-dev] Fwd: [Bitbucket] Pull request #119: Major revamp of the D language support (scons/scons)
On Thu, Mar 20, 2014 at 1:09 AM, Dirk Bächle tshor...@gmx.de wrote: Let graphs get messy and ugly, but this is what happens when you actually work with a VCS. Polishing, folding and rebasing commits only to make the history look pretty is not really required from my side...but let me stress this again, it's just my personal opinion. I really acknowledge and appreciate all the work that Russel, Gary and Martin have put into this. If you like a clean history better, fine...just continue. Especially if this removes your obvious doubts about whether Mercurial did the right thing (This merge looks mixed up, it can't be right.). But you don't have to do it for me. ;) Best regards, Dirk P.S.: Just as an addendum, trying to provide an explanation for what I wrote above...I see worse things every day, we're using ClearCase at work. ;) Depends on the project. You probably use VCS just for storage. I use it also for troubleshooting, so the general rule - if you can't understand the flow of changes during review - what is the chance that you will understand it when everything goes down all of a sudden? If I have to revert a commit later, I need to be sure that there are no parts that are already critical for the other parts of the system. -- anatoly t. ___ Scons-dev mailing list Scons-dev@scons.org http://two.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/scons-dev
