git/list[1] front-page[2] threads[3] people[4] search[5] about
 

Re: [PATCH] branch: use $curr_branch_short more

From
Felipe Contreras <felipe.contreras@gmail.com>
Date
Sep 8, 2013, 23:13 UTC
Message-ID
<CAMP44s0LOhGWpgy6iy==WC7tBtjUjG-CTJ6jXNm+Jumu-5OkXw@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To
<522C95F3.5030308@web.de>
On Sun, Sep 8, 2013 at 10:21 AM, René Scharfe <l.s.r@web.de> wrote:
Show 15 quoted lines
> Am 31.08.2013 19:20, schrieb Felipe Contreras:
>
>> A summary should contain as much information that would allow me to
>> skip the commit message as possible.
>>
>> If I can't tell from the summary if I can safely skip the commit
>> message, the summary is not doing a good job.
>>
>> "trivial simplification" explains the "what", and the "why" at the
>> same time, and allows most people to skip the commit message, thus is
>> a good summary.
>
>
> No patch should be skipped on the mailing list.  As you wrote, trivial
> patches can still be wrong.

What patches each persons skips is each person's own decision, don't be patronizing, if I want to skip a trivial patch, I will, I can't read each and every patch from the dozens of mailing lists I'm subscribed to, and there's no way each and every reader is going to read each and every patch. They should be prioritized, and trivial ones can be safely skipped by most people.

Here's a good example from a simple summary that I didn't write:

t2024: Fix inconsequential typos http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.git/234038

Do I have to read this patch? No. I know it's inconsequential, I can safely skip it, the key word being *I*. *Somebody* should read it, sure, and I'm sure at least Junio would, but I don't need to.

Show 9 quoted lines
> When going through the history I can see that quickly recognizing
> insubstantial changes is useful, but if I see a summary twice then in my
> mind forms a big question mark -- why did the same thing had to be done yet
> again?
>
> As an example, both 0d12e59f (pull: replace unnecessary sed invocation) and
> bc2bbc45 (pull, rebase: simplify to use die()) could arguably have had the
> summary "trivial simplification", but I'm glad the author went with
> something a bit more specific.

Well I wont. Because it takes long to read, and after reading I still don't don't if they are trivial or not, I might actually have to read the commit message, but to be honest, I would probably go right into the diff itself, because judging from Git's history, chances are that somebody wrote a novel there with the important bit I'm looking for just at the end, to don't ruin the suspense.

In the first commit, it's saying it's a single invocation, so I take it it's trivial, but what is it replaced with? Is the code simpler, is it more complex? I don't know, I'm still not being told *why* that patch is made. It says 'unnecessary' but why is it unnecessary?

In the second commit, it's saying it's a simplification, but I don't know if it's just one instance, or a thousand, so I don't know what would be the impact of the patch.

Either way I'm forced to read more just to know if it was safe for me to skip them, at which point the whole purpose of a summary is defeated.

>> Again, triviality and correctness are two separate different things.
>> The patch is trivial even if you can't judge it's correctness.
>
> Well, in terms of impact I agree.
No, in all terms. A patch can be:

Trivial and correct Trivial and incorrect Non-trivial and correct Non-trivial and incorrect

Show 6 quoted lines
>> To me, what you are describing is an obvious patch, not a trivial one.
>> An obvious patch is so obvious that you can judge it's correctness
>> easily by looking at the diff, a trivial one is of little importance.
>
> That's one definition; I think I had the mathematical notion in mind that
> calls proofs trivial which are immediately evident.

We are not talking about mathematics, we are talking about the English human language.

-- 
Felipe Contreras
Previous: René ScharfeNext: René Scharfe
Message 22 of 26 in “Trivial cleanups and fixes”
  1. 0/6 Trivial cleanups and fixesFelipe Contreras, Aug 30, 2013
  2. 1/6 reset: trivial refactoringFelipe Contreras, Aug 30, 2013
  3. Junio C HamanoAug 31, 2013
  4. 2/6 branch: trivial style fixFelipe Contreras, Aug 30, 2013
  5. Junio C HamanoAug 31, 2013
  6. 3/6 rebase: trivial style fixesFelipe Contreras, Aug 30, 2013
  7. Junio C HamanoAug 31, 2013
  8. 4/6 reset: trivial style cleanupFelipe Contreras, Aug 30, 2013
  9. Junio C HamanoAug 31, 2013
  10. 5/6 add: trivial style cleanupFelipe Contreras, Aug 30, 2013
  11. Junio C HamanoAug 31, 2013
  12. 6/6 pull: trivial cleanupFelipe Contreras, Aug 30, 2013
  13. Junio C HamanoAug 31, 2013
  14. Felipe ContrerasAug 31, 2013
  15. branch: use $curr_branch_short moreRené Scharfe, Aug 31, 2013
  16. Felipe ContrerasAug 31, 2013
  17. René ScharfeAug 31, 2013
  18. Felipe ContrerasAug 31, 2013
  19. René ScharfeAug 31, 2013
  20. Felipe ContrerasAug 31, 2013
  21. René ScharfeSep 8, 2013
  22. Felipe ContrerasSep 8, 2013
  23. René ScharfeSep 15, 2013
  24. Felipe ContrerasSep 15, 2013
  25. Junio C HamanoSep 3, 2013
  26. pull: use $curr_branch_short moreRené Scharfe, Sep 8, 2013

Read the whole thread, see it on lore, or plain text.

$ cat FOOTERMessages come from the public archive at lore.kernel.org/git, fetched every hour. The front page is chosen and written each morning by an AI editor and can be wrong; the threads themselves are the record. About and API. For agents: an MCP server at https://gitlist.dev/mcp, and any thread, story or person page as Markdown by adding .md to its URL (or sending Accept: text/markdown). Details in /llms.txt.