Git Mailing List Archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
To: Oswald Buddenhagen <oswald.buddenhagen@gmx.de>
Cc: Linus Arver <linusa@google.com>,
	Phillip Wood <phillip.wood123@gmail.com>,
	git@vger.kernel.org, Kristoffer Haugsbakk <code@khaugsbakk.name>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] sequencer: beautify subject of reverts of reverts
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2023 09:31:49 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <xmqqwmyk3slm.fsf@gitster.g> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <ZMPgn1QQltyE7koe@ugly> (Oswald Buddenhagen's message of "Fri, 28 Jul 2023 17:37:03 +0200")

Oswald Buddenhagen <oswald.buddenhagen@gmx.de> writes:

> also, the "no more than two words" is sort of arbitrary - one can make
> a pretty convincing argument for just one word as well.

I doubt it.  If you squash "revert revert revert" into "revert", it
means "revert" no longer means "singly reverted", so you destroy the
goal (3) completely.  Using two at least lets you differentiate
"ended up rejecting after reverted multiple times" and "reverted
just once".

> finally, just dropping that info would typically result in multiple
> (non-trivial) commits with the same summary, which i don't really
> like.  leaving the uglier long variant (and the user hopefully
> amending it) avoids it.

Actually, I am fine with your 

> ... it falls into the "you
> should get creative when that happens" category (which is codified in
> the manual by my reworked patches).

and leave this whole discussion behind it.

If we were doing something, we should make sure what we are doing is
reasonable, and moving away from evaluation criteria like "beautify"
and "too nerdy" and steping back to see what we are trying to
achieve was an attempt to refocus the discussion.  From that point
of view, allowing arbitrary number of "Reapply" repeated, optionally
prefixed by a single "Revert", does not sound like it is much better
compared to the current one---is it worth this much time to discuss,
only to halve the length of long runs of "Revert"?

  reply	other threads:[~2023-07-28 16:31 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 53+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2023-04-28  8:35 [PATCH v2] sequencer: beautify subject of reverts of reverts Oswald Buddenhagen
2023-04-28 18:35 ` Junio C Hamano
2023-04-28 19:11   ` Oswald Buddenhagen
2023-05-01 16:44     ` Junio C Hamano
2023-05-01 19:10       ` Oswald Buddenhagen
2023-05-01 19:12         ` Junio C Hamano
2023-05-05 17:25     ` Junio C Hamano
2023-05-17  9:05 ` Phillip Wood
2023-05-17 10:00   ` Oswald Buddenhagen
2023-05-17 11:20     ` Phillip Wood
2023-05-17 17:02       ` Oswald Buddenhagen
2023-05-18  9:58         ` Phillip Wood
2023-05-18 16:28           ` Junio C Hamano
2023-07-28  5:26             ` Linus Arver
2023-07-28  9:45               ` Oswald Buddenhagen
2023-07-28 15:10                 ` Junio C Hamano
2023-07-28 15:37                   ` Oswald Buddenhagen
2023-07-28 16:31                     ` Junio C Hamano [this message]
2023-07-28 16:47                       ` Oswald Buddenhagen
2023-07-28 17:36                   ` Linus Arver
2023-08-09 17:15 ` [PATCH v3 1/2] " Oswald Buddenhagen
2023-08-09 17:15   ` [PATCH v3 2/2] doc: revert: add discussion Oswald Buddenhagen
2023-08-10 21:50     ` Linus Arver
2023-08-10 22:00       ` Linus Arver
2023-08-11 15:10         ` Phillip Wood
2023-08-12  6:25           ` Oswald Buddenhagen
2023-08-13 22:09             ` Junio C Hamano
2023-08-14 14:13               ` Oswald Buddenhagen
2023-08-11 12:49       ` Oswald Buddenhagen
2023-08-11 23:00         ` Linus Arver
2023-08-12  7:19           ` Oswald Buddenhagen
2023-09-07 21:29             ` Linus Arver
2023-08-11 15:08       ` Phillip Wood
2023-08-11 17:10         ` Junio C Hamano
2023-08-11 17:05       ` Junio C Hamano
2023-08-11 17:44         ` Re* " Junio C Hamano
2023-08-11 17:53           ` Junio C Hamano
2023-08-11 17:56             ` rsbecker
2023-08-11 18:16           ` Eric Sunshine
2023-08-11 18:16           ` Oswald Buddenhagen
2023-08-11 19:43             ` Junio C Hamano
2023-08-11 15:05   ` [PATCH v3 1/2] sequencer: beautify subject of reverts of reverts Phillip Wood
2023-08-11 16:59     ` Junio C Hamano
2023-08-11 17:13       ` Oswald Buddenhagen
2023-08-21 17:07   ` [PATCH v4 " Oswald Buddenhagen
2023-08-21 17:07     ` [PATCH v4 2/2] git-revert.txt: add discussion Oswald Buddenhagen
2023-08-21 18:32     ` [PATCH v4 1/2] sequencer: beautify subject of reverts of reverts Junio C Hamano
2023-08-23 20:08     ` Taylor Blau
2023-08-23 21:38       ` Junio C Hamano
2023-08-24  6:14         ` Oswald Buddenhagen
2023-09-02  7:20         ` [PATCH v5] " Oswald Buddenhagen
2023-09-02 22:24           ` Junio C Hamano
2023-09-11 20:12           ` Kristoffer Haugsbakk

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=xmqqwmyk3slm.fsf@gitster.g \
    --to=gitster@pobox.com \
    --cc=code@khaugsbakk.name \
    --cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linusa@google.com \
    --cc=oswald.buddenhagen@gmx.de \
    --cc=phillip.wood123@gmail.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).