1 |
I'd like to discuss whether we should allow/encourage stabilization |
2 |
commits to be less atomic. They often bloat the history, make it hard to |
3 |
skim through the summaries list and people who are looking for |
4 |
stabilization probably do 'git log -- <ebuild-dir>' anyway, no? In |
5 |
addition, I'm not sure the bug information where people post "stable" |
6 |
comments is very useful. |
7 |
|
8 |
At least, the previous commits on |
9 |
app-leechcraft/ |
10 |
|
11 |
could have been category-commits, since they all refer to the same thing |
12 |
and the same bug. |
13 |
|
14 |
I'd go so far to say allow people to do commits like: |
15 |
""" |
16 |
amd64 stabilizations |
17 |
|
18 |
<optional list of bugs> |
19 |
""" |
20 |
possibly pre-pending the rough domain like "kde", if any. I think kde |
21 |
herd already does that, no? |
22 |
|
23 |
Unless someone thinks the mass-100+ commits are really useful in the |
24 |
visible history. |