Re: [PATCH v2] sequencer: beautify subject of reverts of reverts
- From
- Linus Arver <linusa@google.com>
- Date
- Jul 28, 2023, 05:26 UTC
- Message-ID
- <owly7cqkfvyu.fsf@fine.c.googlers.com>
- In-Reply-To
- <xmqqmt21txid.fsf@gitster.g>
Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> writes:
> It is better for a code to behave > in a dumb but explainable way, than to attempting and failing to act > too clever for its own worth.
I completely agree.
Show 6 quoted lines
> Oswald, I do not think GIGO is really an excuse in this case, when > the only value of the topic is to make the behaviour less awkward by > creating something better than a repeated revert-revert sequence, > revert-reapply-revert is worse, as it is markedly harder to guess > what it really means for a reversion of revert-revert-revert than > "revert" repeated four times.
How about introducing a suffix (+ or -) after the word "Revert" to indicate the application/inclusion (+) or removal (-) of a commit? Example:
- "foo: bar baz quux"
- Revert "foo: bar baz quux"
- Revert(+) Revert(-) "foo: bar baz quux"
- Revert(-) Revert(+) Revert(-) "foo: bar baz quux"
- Revert(+) Revert(-) Revert(+) Revert(-) "foo: bar baz quux"I think the above increases readability. I chose to keep the same style as the status quo for the first revert, because the "(-)" suffix alone without a neighboring "(+)", as in
Revert(-) "foo: bar baz quux"
might confuse users. This style would also do away with the multiple quoting levels that make the current multi-revert subject lines look messy at the end. Example:
Revert "Revert "Revert "Revert some subject"""
^
This part is starting to
become noisy.(Sorry for jumping into this thread so late, but the mention of this topic on the recent "What's cooking" message [1] (that this topic would be discarded) got me interested.)
[1] https://lore.kernel.org/git/xmqqpm4d9g54.fsf@gitster.g/T/#mf4edccc7bbc6365a03eaf106121694a27559d275