On 20 October 2015 at 16:42, Bryan Drewery <bdrew...@freebsd.org> wrote: > > I really think we should just do a full revert and recommit in these > cases, and not even a forced commit. Neither this commit or a forced > commit will show in 'svn blame' or even during a bisect. It really just > becomes luck to find the right commit noting the message. IMHO 'svn > blame' is more important than some extra churn in 'svn log' or email. It > does add more steps in 'svn blame' but it ends up giving the right > message more obviously. > > I'm not asking to redo this commit now, but I think we should have a > standard of just recommitting to fix mistakes.
This is the approach taken by LLVM and it works well there. You're right that it introduces a bit of churn but I think it's worth the cost. _______________________________________________ svn-src-head@freebsd.org mailing list https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/svn-src-head To unsubscribe, send any mail to "svn-src-head-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
