Re: git-subtree Ready #2

From: Avery Pennarun <apenwarr@gmail.com>
Date: Feb 28, 2012, 22:42 UTC
Message-ID: <CAHqTa-2An1Vge-_Zjc8f0ZdgNo3Yd72YxEMSAKQkRaHfJ65n+A@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <m3ehtfvhkv.fsf@localhost.localdomain>

On Mon, Feb 27, 2012 at 9:04 PM, Jakub Narebski <jnareb@gmail.com> wrote:

Show 13 quoted lines

> Jeff King <peff@peff.net> writes:
>> Yeah, I don't see much point in rewriting. If parts of the history suck,
>> then so be it.  It's probably not that big to store. And while it's
>> sometimes easier to fix bad commit messages when they are recent and in
>> your memory (rather than trying to remember later what you meant to
>> say), I think it is already too late for that. Any archaeology you do
>> now to make good commit messages could probably just as easily be done
>> if and when somebody actually needs the commit message later (emphasis
>> on the "if" -- it's likely that nobody will care about most of the
>> commit messages later at all).
>
> Anyway we already have subtree merges if subsystem with bad error
> messages -- see gitweb.

So be it then! May my lame commit messages persist forever! As if I don't have enough embarrassing stuff on the Internet.

(Personally I think the vast majority of the commit messages are perfectly fine, and the ones that aren't generally describe boring commits anyway, like changes to the 'todo' file.)

Have fun,

Avery