On Mon, 5 Mar 2012 at 17:38:18 +0200, Rodolfo kix Garcia wrote: > El 05.03.2012 17:32, Carlos R. Mafra escribió: > >On Mon, 5 Mar 2012 at 12:00:24 +0200, Rodolfo kix Garcia wrote: > >>El 05.03.2012 00:32, Carlos R. Mafra escribió: > >>>On Sun, 4 Mar 2012 at 17:31:52 +0100, Rodolfo García Peñas wrote: > >>>> > >>>>Subject: [PATCH] WindowMaker: Tech+opaque resize > >>>> > >>>>This patch solves a problem when the user set "technical" and > >>>>"opaque" flags and then resize the window. > >>>>The pach also removes some curly brackets and make some if-else > >>>>easier. > >>> > >>>Thanks for the patch! > >> > >>:-) > >> > >>>But please, don't mix cleanups with bug fixes. If you want to > >>>clean the > >>>style a bit (which is nice) you should write the cleanup patch > >>first > >>>doing just the cleanup. Then you write the smaller bug fix, trying > >>>to explain in the message what happened etc. > >>>It makes reviewing much easier. > >> > >>I know, sorry. The problem is that to understand the code, I rewrote > >>(cleanup) some parts,... > >>The patch is not in the git, do you need that I rewrite the patches? > > > >I'll upload it as-is, no need to rewrite anything. I just wanted > >to raise the issue. > > Ok, no problem. In this way, in the future, probably I will split > some patches in various, to better understanding. After, you can > rebase it if you want to upload them.
Splitting patches according to what they do should is the rule and not the exception! The exception is accepting patches doing more than one thing at a time. Given that the patch under discussion was just slightly bigger than necessary I pushed it anyway. > >>About that idea, in the commit > >>http://repo.or.cz/w/wmaker-crm.git/commit/a3c99bddc891cbd4cae233421920b83acc733186 > >>I sent two patches, but you uploaded only one (rebased). The reason > >>was that the clean file is not a menu part. If we need to do a > >>revert, we need to remember it. > > > >The reason I rebased is that I don't think that debian-specific > >commits should have any granularity as they are not really pertinent > >to wmaker development per se, so they should be as invisible as > >possible. > > Ok, no problem I will send the patches splitted to better > understanding. You can rebase it to upload. If the patches are > "easy" to understand, then I will send as only one patch. But the above splitting rule does _not_ apply for changes under debian/, as the wmaker git repo is about _Window Maker_ development and not about debian. The rule for debian/ is that you should merge as many patches together as possible in order to stay "invisible" in the repository history. -- To unsubscribe, send mail to [email protected].
