Le Thu, 13 Dec 2012 21:48:23 -0500, "R. David Murray" <rdmur...@bitdance.com> a écrit : > On Thu, 13 Dec 2012 20:21:24 -0500, Trent Nelson > <tr...@snakebite.org> wrote: > > - Use a completely separate clone to house all the > > intermediate commits, then generate a diff once the final commit is > > ready, then apply that diff to the main cpython repo, then push > > that. This approach is fine, but it seems counter-intuitive to the > > whole concept of DVCS. > > Perhaps. But that's exactly what I did with the email package changes > for 3.3. > > You seem to have a tension between "all those dirty little commits" > and "clean history" and the fact that a dvcs is designed to preserve > all those commits...if you don't want those intermediate commits in > the official repo, then why is a diff/patch a bad way to achieve > that? If you keep your pulls up to date in your feature repo, the > diff/patch process is simple and smooth.
+1. We definitely don't want tons of small incremental commits in the official repo. "One changeset == one issue" should be the ideal horizon when committing changes. Regards Antoine. _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com