4 ms·

You're missing that you may have made not one, but multiple substantive changes to file1, and you want to commit those changes separately.

by gcv 19y ago

axod 19y ago
Then you have a mess whatever revision control system you use. You have to manually decide which changes you want to commit in the file, and which you don't. I still say it's better to avoid that mess in the first place.
- mhartl 19y ago
  Then you have a mess whatever revision control system you use. True, but some make it much easier than others. Git is one of the easy ones. I still say it's better to avoid that mess in the first place. The article addressed this, and concluded as follows: Here’s a general principle I would like my VCS to acknowledge: moving from the present point B to some desired point C should not require a change in behavior at point A in the past. More simply, the phrase: “you should have,” ought to set off alarm bells.
- gcv 19y ago
  From whose perspective is that a mess? From the perspective of a source control system which cannot deal with how I choose to work? Honestly, no offense meant, but I'm starting to wonder if Subversion is the Blub of source control systems.
  - axod 19y ago
    For me it's a mess. If I start to fix bug B on top of a half implemented feature A, I end up with a mess. I don't understand why you would work that way, and don't understand what git solves that svn doesn't. You still have to untangle the mess yourself.
    - gcv 19y ago
      You've seriously never looked at a file and said to yourself, "These changes belong in two separate commits"?
allertonm 19y ago
This only works if you can guarantee that the changes are not intertwingled in the same code block. He is also taking a gamble that the result of his selection will actually parse/compile/pass unit tests (select as appropriate) - he has no way to be sure of this. He is pretty much going to have to do a "get" into another working copy to be able to check this out, so I don't think he is gaining quite as much as he believes.

You're missing that you may have made not one, but multiple substantive changes to file1, and you want to commit those changes separately.

by gcv 19y ago

You're missing that you may have made not one, but multiple substantive changes to file1, and you want to commit those changes separately.

axod 19y ago

Then you have a mess whatever revision control system you use. You have to manually decide which changes you want to commit in the file, and which you don't. I still say it's better to avoid that mess in the first place.

mhartl 19y ago
Then you have a mess whatever revision control system you use. True, but some make it much easier than others. Git is one of the easy ones. I still say it's better to avoid that mess in the first place. The article addressed this, and concluded as follows: Here’s a general principle I would like my VCS to acknowledge: moving from the present point B to some desired point C should not require a change in behavior at point A in the past. More simply, the phrase: “you should have,” ought to set off alarm bells.
gcv 19y ago
From whose perspective is that a mess? From the perspective of a source control system which cannot deal with how I choose to work? Honestly, no offense meant, but I'm starting to wonder if Subversion is the Blub of source control systems.
- axod 19y ago
  For me it's a mess. If I start to fix bug B on top of a half implemented feature A, I end up with a mess. I don't understand why you would work that way, and don't understand what git solves that svn doesn't. You still have to untangle the mess yourself.
  - gcv 19y ago
    You've seriously never looked at a file and said to yourself, "These changes belong in two separate commits"?

allertonm 19y ago

This only works if you can guarantee that the changes are not intertwingled in the same code block. He is also taking a gamble that the result of his selection will actually parse/compile/pass unit tests (select as appropriate) - he has no way to be sure of this. He is pretty much going to have to do a "get" into another working copy to be able to check this out, so I don't think he is gaining quite as much as he believes.