On 2019.10.10 17:49, Leif Lindholm wrote:
On Thu, Oct 10, 2019 at 01:41:20PM +0100, Pete Batard wrote:
It's a disagreement. And the same goes for 3/5 & 4/5. Please see the note I
wrote in 0/5 for the v2, because the cover letter this is usually the place
I try to clarify elements that may throw off a maintainer, and that don't
belong in a commit message.
Not so sound flippant here, but as long as there isn't an MTV award for
"Most atomic codebase ever", I just don't have the time to split what I
consider to be frivolous commits. The reasoning behind that is that I
realistically don't consider that people are actually going to be thrown off
by a "while I was here I also fixed an obvious typo" that got added into an
existing commit or, most important, that even if they do, the amount of time
that is going to be collectively wasted by people who might be thrown of by
not having uber atomicity is not going to exceed the amount of time it will
cost *me* to split it.
Therefore, while I do understand the desire to have an atomic commit
history, I'm afraid that if we can't strike a balance between how much extra
time contributors are expected to waste vs how atomic a *real-life*
codebase is enforced to be, if I have to split every little typo and
stylistic fix into yet another commit, I'm simply not going to bother fixing
typos or low hanging fruits I see any more.
I understand, we all have a limited supply of time.
Since I don't wish to start implementing different rules for different
contributors, could I ask you to stop contributing typo and low
hanging fruit fixes?
I'm fine with that.
Regards,
/Pete
Best Regards,
Leif
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Groups.io Links: You receive all messages sent to this group.
View/Reply Online (#48748): https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/message/48748
Mute This Topic: https://groups.io/mt/34441817/21656
Group Owner: devel+ow...@edk2.groups.io
Unsubscribe: https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/unsub [arch...@mail-archive.com]
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
