| 1 |
On Mon, Oct 19, 2015 at 1:13 PM, hasufell <hasufell@g.o> wrote: |
| 2 |
> |
| 3 |
> We already know that. But if e.g. ago runs his scripts at 00:00 with |
| 4 |
> ~300 packages stabilized, the history (without git command line) on |
| 5 |
> github/gitweb will be fun to read (and people DO that). |
| 6 |
> |
| 7 |
|
| 8 |
It doesn't seem like it would have been any better in the cvs days, |
| 9 |
but I guess that isn't a reason to reject this on its own. |
| 10 |
|
| 11 |
If this was about changing the copyright headers in all the ebuilds in |
| 12 |
the tree I'd say that this is a million related trivial changes that |
| 13 |
can be merged. Nobody needs to see that in the history broken out. |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
However, stabilizing a single package really is an impactful change. |
| 16 |
The fact that you're doing 100 of them at one time doesn't really |
| 17 |
diminish the impact of each one. Any of them could break a system or |
| 18 |
need to be reverted. |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
If they're being done at once because they're all part of some library |
| 21 |
stabilization then I'd combine them into a commit, because they are |
| 22 |
actually related. |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
Maybe what is needed is better tools for tagging/filtering history? |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
-- |
| 27 |
Rich |
Archives