From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 85A3BEB64DD for ; Fri, 11 Aug 2023 15:11:03 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S235664AbjHKPLC (ORCPT ); Fri, 11 Aug 2023 11:11:02 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:34470 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S235614AbjHKPLB (ORCPT ); Fri, 11 Aug 2023 11:11:01 -0400 Received: from mail-wr1-x42f.google.com (mail-wr1-x42f.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::42f]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9249B18F for ; Fri, 11 Aug 2023 08:11:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-wr1-x42f.google.com with SMTP id ffacd0b85a97d-317dcdae365so1791477f8f.1 for ; Fri, 11 Aug 2023 08:11:00 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20221208; t=1691766659; x=1692371459; h=content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to:from:references:cc:to :content-language:subject:reply-to:user-agent:mime-version:date :message-id:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=6u+r8gR1JPtvUkcMy8C4+xdX21qD/mJA4VVOx8GTUQ0=; b=TCVhoSyDiT/LBro9AaIhv8mgaoBL6XeQPKQLZwJEbY8kM9QchltF7f3vTnxPzzP+39 17xpR8r2dFPqEPZYignCJf+0PSvHrniLLEwltJxNlRjHXngOmUYQH2dFOnVSvrxjB7PY y+71x2H1qab6QmYQPz0UuuqkiCdme25YBvDhMs8mjukW3t0z6tBg7g6CedlSxItM8Dic mUOe2bsUj4yxWjoBwmy7KGIOylect1L4Xq+GImdfrkQifhaRKsAkIXwOvk3Q6rpsQQgU LyeepE8DN1B7Vk9+Mmo02CJIZLGdmX2rxIUaWwlO2fTEorUgw7MZEIOD7kMx7+k09N9C /INw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20221208; t=1691766659; x=1692371459; h=content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to:from:references:cc:to :content-language:subject:reply-to:user-agent:mime-version:date :message-id:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id :reply-to; bh=6u+r8gR1JPtvUkcMy8C4+xdX21qD/mJA4VVOx8GTUQ0=; b=O2GV3AfI8FlrSAyyoTBxpzXeJ7ljmlwmc+AGGAl9SDUUnxiEZuPbE/tmqt8FWikqyC XO8ZOx8DpCd3VGVobCvQpK/wevR/RvSWdhhqXyc/YzUgf6GtSCbcRGT3CAU2NlzqkJ4E xUO3hLxvZSE3oaVwRh4X3gS9NNXkhu31MUnWPwyTLRlPFCArWkKX9NawwnjShBS9RtXn 9Fvr2EgalWy+HlqVOsgNWBzG0ZVdknQibIFzH7DNYPnkHFqHzJ3BXfhZ/2faZpFB/Qvc RQSwy5kjT7FbhFRm8tOwn+nfkE6yIOSHCQduXFwdp4mJabtbfDgYrNpOQhGX79zHPok1 3Icg== X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YzOZbomUtzLYqH7KrATxztqw7atbaLAvN7eOlGhQApJg4HpAI/f HTMBfNZNBxJBKQ2/9pTTWSw= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IEF9jdq4GpmUZjCU3qN9fuFB2EBco94+1kHbLpErbtsopUdxp/UnbrQ9yOz0LRhz6EwlzlxEQ== X-Received: by 2002:adf:e6c2:0:b0:315:8f4f:81b2 with SMTP id y2-20020adfe6c2000000b003158f4f81b2mr1605465wrm.64.1691766658784; Fri, 11 Aug 2023 08:10:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.1.116] ([90.242.223.1]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id j2-20020a5d4482000000b0031437ec7ec1sm5713305wrq.2.2023.08.11.08.10.58 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Fri, 11 Aug 2023 08:10:58 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <07028529-cbe1-55d0-4ab0-9f3ec03a4fd1@gmail.com> Date: Fri, 11 Aug 2023 16:10:55 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/102.13.0 Reply-To: phillip.wood@dunelm.org.uk Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/2] doc: revert: add discussion Content-Language: en-GB-large To: Linus Arver , Oswald Buddenhagen , git@vger.kernel.org Cc: Junio C Hamano References: <20230428083528.1699221-1-oswald.buddenhagen@gmx.de> <20230809171531.2564807-1-oswald.buddenhagen@gmx.de> <20230809171531.2564807-2-oswald.buddenhagen@gmx.de> From: Phillip Wood In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org On 10/08/2023 23:00, Linus Arver wrote: > Linus Arver writes: > >> How about >> the following rewording? >> >> While git creates a basic commit message automatically, it is >> _strongly_ recommended to explain why the original commit is being >> reverted. In addition, repeatedly reverting the same commit will > > Hmph, "repeatedly reverting the same commit" sounds wrong because > strictly speaking there is only 1 "same commit" (the original commit). While it isn't strictly accurate I think that wording is easy enough to understand. I think it is hard to find a more accurate wording that isn't too verbose or cumbersome. Best Wishes Phillip > Perhaps > > In addition, repeatedly reverting the same progression of reverts will > > or even > > In addition, repeatedly reverting the same revert chain will > > is better here?