"Philip Oakley" <philipoak...@iee.org> writes:
>> I think this is about
> Yes, but the original wording didn't make me think that.
Yeah, it is very plausible that it is not limited to you, and I
agree that it is worthwhile to update the description around here.
>>> Also, does 'earliest commit requiring fixup/squash' fully convey that
>>> its the one to fix.
>> I cannot tell if that a question or a statement?
> It's a question. In your prior para you offer "they fix the very first
> commit that invited these fixups" as an alternate.
I think both are equally understandable to me (but I am not the
primary target audience).
> It's when a users mental model is that they got their first fixup
> wrong and it's that fixup they are correcting, and later they add
> different fixups to the orignal that it all gets hairy.
> (diffs must have the right sequence, while snapshots don't care - so
> if we keep the diff sequence, we don't care about the user's mental
> model as the end results are the same).
> The writeup needs to cope with the mental model rather than the end result.
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html