Re: [PATCH 1/2] sequencer: trivial fix

From: Felipe Contreras <felipe.contreras@gmail.com>
Date: May 29, 2013, 13:46 UTC
Message-ID: <CAMP44s0vaPUmvS8OzZ_4UR5XmKK-fyU4nE47Djjr215zkgpRFg@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CACsJy8Do-djwjVP1YvGnvsbdiWjE47KTK4pZZ3Qdnubvd-r3Lw@mail.gmail.com>

On Wed, May 29, 2013 at 8:42 AM, Duy Nguyen <pclouds@gmail.com> wrote:

Show 22 quoted lines

> On Wed, May 29, 2013 at 8:34 PM, Felipe Contreras
> <felipe.contreras@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Wed, May 29, 2013 at 8:25 AM, Duy Nguyen <pclouds@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Mon, May 27, 2013 at 11:52 PM, Felipe Contreras
>>> <felipe.contreras@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> We should free objects before leaving.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Felipe Contreras <felipe.contreras@gmail.com>
>>>
>>> Micronit: perhaps you should move the "free obejcts before leaving"
>>> (in do_pick_commit) to the subject instead of "trivial fix", which
>>> adds no value to the patch.
>>
>> Perhaps. I prefer it this way because it's really a trivial fix not
>> really worth much time thinking about it. So when somebody is browsing
>> the history they can happily skip this one. The time save by not
>> reading I think adds more value than any succinct description that
>> would force each and every patch-reviewer/history-reader to read it.
>
> Some time from now, assume a ridiculus case when this function grows
> more complex and somebody wonders what the "leave" label is for, "git
> log --oneline -Slabel:" showing "trivial fix" would not help much.

Fortunately that's not the main use-case, and for that single instance that probably will never happen, I think it's not too much to ask to this hypothetical developer to remove the --oneline, or copy-paste the SHA-1 and take a peek. He would probably need to do that anyway.

-- 
Felipe Contreras