> On May 31, 2019, at 2:40 PM, Udo Kohlmeyer <u...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> If we are concerned about the single line that can break the product, then
> our testing has failed us on so many levels, that there is no hope.
Sorry, I used a hyperbolic statement about looking for 1 line out of 1000. The
point was “formatting” or “cleanup” style commits are better left separate
because looking for the real change in that sea of change is hard.
> But looking forward to see how long one can sustain the "factor -> commit ->
> make changes required to fulfill JIRA -> commit -> manual merge"…
It’s only a problem if you are cleaning up lots a code. Not a bad problem to
have and the future looks brighter each time.
> Also, who reviews the refactor, because even that can introduce unintentional
> bugs... same effort as single commit. In single commit, if the refactor has
> made code cleaner, clearer and simpler, maybe 1 commit is easier to follow.
I think there is a distinction between a refactor and cleanup. Consider the
time we decide to reformat all the code, that was a cleanup. Now as we are
going through the code and IJ reports every other line as a static analyzer
warning, fixing that is a cleanup. All these cleanups have been reviews like
any other PR. Th point being made was that they are done in a way that allows
the reviewer to review the clean and the change independently.
A refactor would would be a complete reorganization of code and should have the
tests, reviews, etc. that go with it.
Regardless, all are reviewed.
-Jake
