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? Best Regards, Leif -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Groups.io Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#48744): https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/message/48744 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] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
