Re: git revert with partial commit.

From: Sergey Organov <sorganov@gmail.com>
Date: Apr 7, 2023, 17:20 UTC
Message-ID: <87mt3jbodw.fsf@osv.gnss.ru>
In-Reply-To: <CAMP44s32nLHCZmWQ3V5sBL6WZA9qqWXi86c+=Bxt+GQ8fPmFfQ@mail.gmail.com>

Felipe Contreras <felipe.contreras@gmail.com> writes:

Show 21 quoted lines

> On Wed, Apr 5, 2023 at 1:39 AM Sergey Organov <sorganov@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>> Felipe Contreras <felipe.contreras@gmail.com> writes:
>
>> > If the user wants to do it, the tool should help him do it, not
>> > pontificate about what is heretic.
>> > The user is still going to do it, like with a rebase plugin on
>> > Mercurial, or with `git filter-branch` and then merge the result.
>> > All the tool is achieving is being annoying by not helping the
>> > user.
>> Yep, and I'm worried by such trends in Git as well. Looks like
>> growing influence of software development culture where the user is
>> not considered to be intelligent enough to make proper decisions by
>> himself, and needs to be thoroughly guided by the tool (designers)
>> all the time.
>
> Which ironically goes against the philosophy of the original author of
> Git:
>
>> No project is more important than the users of the project.
>> -- Linus Torvalds

I rather bother about too much care for the users in the aforementioned cases, similar to the way overly cautious mother cares about her children, all this being absolutely well-intentioned.

The problem with such care is that it's inefficient to drive nails in with a hand hammer in a soft wrapping, though it's admittedly less dangerous for ones fingers.

Overall, when using a tool, I prefer to feel myself a grown-up human being responsible for my own actions, rather than a child under intense guidance and excessive protection. I'm thankful for proper safety measures, but I want potentially unsafe action to be performed nevertheless when I actually mean it, instead of lengthy display of rhetorics about why I should not have had even attempted it in the first place.

-- 
Sergey Organov