Live data from Hacker News

Our beautiful fake histories

joeyh.name

11–15 of 15 posts

Re: Our beautiful fake histories

#11
post #10

I've been thinking of a "sub-commit" concept, so a "beautiful, fake" commit that is atomic for most git operations, can be inspected more deeply, revealing bundled messy sub-commits that may be useful for understanding the history of that change. You get "every commit is a deliberately chosen, well-tested logical unit" as well as "present history as it actually happened." Maybe something like this can be done with ce…

I think merge commits are sufficient but I thought a tool/script could help so I made [git-pinch][1]. It makes it easy to make merge commits without having to go through the trouble of making a branch. I wouldn't say others should necessarily use it but maybe it's a start. One thing merge commits add in complicating one's workflow is rebase requires options to preserve them and sometimes doesn't play nice. [1]: https…

[deleted]

Re: Our beautiful fake histories

#13

I've been thinking of a "sub-commit" concept, so a "beautiful, fake" commit that is atomic for most git operations, can be inspected more deeply, revealing bundled messy sub-commits that may be useful for understanding the history of that change. You get "every commit is a deliberately chosen, well-tested logical unit" as well as "present history as it actually happened." Maybe something like this can be done with ce…

Are you familiar with Mercurial's Changeset Evolution? https://mercurial.selenic.com/wiki/ChangesetEvolution

It includes metadata that allows a changeset to be marked obsolete, and to provide successors.

Re: Our beautiful fake histories

#14
post #10

I've been thinking of a "sub-commit" concept, so a "beautiful, fake" commit that is atomic for most git operations, can be inspected more deeply, revealing bundled messy sub-commits that may be useful for understanding the history of that change. You get "every commit is a deliberately chosen, well-tested logical unit" as well as "present history as it actually happened." Maybe something like this can be done with ce…

I think merge commits are sufficient but I thought a tool/script could help so I made [git-pinch][1]. It makes it easy to make merge commits without having to go through the trouble of making a branch. I wouldn't say others should necessarily use it but maybe it's a start. One thing merge commits add in complicating one's workflow is rebase requires options to preserve them and sometimes doesn't play nice. [1]: https…

That's a neat tool I'll keep in mind, thanks.

Re: Our beautiful fake histories

#15

I've been thinking of a "sub-commit" concept, so a "beautiful, fake" commit that is atomic for most git operations, can be inspected more deeply, revealing bundled messy sub-commits that may be useful for understanding the history of that change. You get "every commit is a deliberately chosen, well-tested logical unit" as well as "present history as it actually happened." Maybe something like this can be done with ce…

Are you familiar with Mercurial's Changeset Evolution? https://mercurial.selenic.com/wiki/ChangesetEvolution It includes metadata that allows a changeset to be marked obsolete, and to provide successors.

I wasn't familiar, and I'm not familiar with Mercurial in general, but that looks like it could help. Thanks, I'll keep it in mind.
Post reply on HN