From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Fredrik Tolf Subject: Volume of commits Date: Thu, 12 Jul 2007 15:16:47 +0200 Message-ID: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii To: git@vger.kernel.org X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Thu Jul 12 15:20:11 2007 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1I8yaY-0002Sm-2C for gcvg-git@gmane.org; Thu, 12 Jul 2007 15:20:10 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1763984AbXGLNUH (ORCPT ); Thu, 12 Jul 2007 09:20:07 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1763965AbXGLNUG (ORCPT ); Thu, 12 Jul 2007 09:20:06 -0400 Received: from main.gmane.org ([80.91.229.2]:52066 "EHLO ciao.gmane.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1759358AbXGLNUE (ORCPT ); Thu, 12 Jul 2007 09:20:04 -0400 Received: from root by ciao.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1I8yaQ-0006ZF-P0 for git@vger.kernel.org; Thu, 12 Jul 2007 15:20:02 +0200 Received: from 1-1-3-7a.rny.sth.bostream.se ([82.182.133.20]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Thu, 12 Jul 2007 15:20:02 +0200 Received: from fredrik by 1-1-3-7a.rny.sth.bostream.se with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Thu, 12 Jul 2007 15:20:02 +0200 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: 1-1-3-7a.rny.sth.bostream.se User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.1 (gnu/linux) Cancel-Lock: sha1:neWPMLKQX5uhtt4B0Um79yfjSks= Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Hi List, I was wondering -- whenever I see Git patches committed to projects like the Linux kernel or Git itself, the commits always seems to be committing rather large changes and be rather well-defined in terms of what they change. When I develop for myself, I usually commit incrementally quite a bit, if for no other reason because Git won't let me switch between branches if I don't commit first. I usually try to keep my commits well-defined, but I don't manage to get anywhere close to what I see when I look at the history of Linux or Git. So what I'm wondering is how you people manage to do this? Do you actually always commit changes this way (and, in that case, how do you switch between branches)? Or do you somehow aggregate the smaller commits into larger patches and recommit them? Or is there some third possibility that I'm missing? Fredrik Tolf