apilloud commented on pull request #14729: URL: https://github.com/apache/beam/pull/14729#issuecomment-913926640
I'm not sure what tools you are using to view history, but many of them have ways to give your preferred view. For example `git log --first-parent`, `git blame --first-parent` etc. I squashed fixup commits and put effort into keeping the commits clean, if I hadn't it would easily be 100 commits. I could have been more aggressive on squashing in a few cases (I thought about squashing "Make it functional " into "Update to vendored Calcite to 1.26.0"), but I would also argue that at least "Update to vendored Calcite to 1.26.0" is over squashed here. A single commit would not have been appropriate in this case. For the two specific examples you've given: The "Update CHANGES.md" doesn't represent any single commit in the PR so I left it separate. The "Up spotbug stack size" is an issue exposed by this change that is mostly unrelated, it could have been a separate PR (like #15362). Perhaps I should have broken more of this out into separate PRs. This PR has been in the works for over a year, and resulted in many split off changes: #13930 #14146 #14518 possibly others I'm not remembering. (Also some of the commits in this change are being reverted in #15457.) I don't think we are going to agree on the proper curation of git history, I don't like small "fixup" changes but I also think there are many cases where a PR can benefit from more than a single commit. I proposed banning the "Squash and Merge" button in 2018: https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/8d29e474e681ab9123280164d95075bb8b0b91486b66d3fa25ed20c2%40%3Cdev.beam.apache.org%3E -- This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service. To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the URL above to go to the specific comment. To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at: [email protected]
