From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jeff King Subject: Re: [PATCH] prepare deprecation of git-revert Date: Sun, 2 Nov 2008 00:41:59 -0400 Message-ID: <20081102044159.GF5261@coredump.intra.peff.net> References: <1225468527-29694-1-git-send-email-madcoder@debian.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Cc: git@vger.kernel.org To: Pierre Habouzit X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Sun Nov 02 05:43:21 2008 connect(): Connection refused Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1KwUo4-0001yL-N3 for gcvg-git-2@gmane.org; Sun, 02 Nov 2008 05:43:21 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751444AbYKBEmF (ORCPT ); Sun, 2 Nov 2008 00:42:05 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751390AbYKBEmE (ORCPT ); Sun, 2 Nov 2008 00:42:04 -0400 Received: from peff.net ([208.65.91.99]:3229 "EHLO peff.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751160AbYKBEmC (ORCPT ); Sun, 2 Nov 2008 00:42:02 -0400 Received: (qmail 22607 invoked by uid 111); 2 Nov 2008 04:42:00 -0000 Received: from coredump.intra.peff.net (HELO coredump.intra.peff.net) (10.0.0.2) by peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.32) with SMTP; Sun, 02 Nov 2008 00:42:00 -0400 Received: by coredump.intra.peff.net (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Sun, 02 Nov 2008 00:41:59 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1225468527-29694-1-git-send-email-madcoder@debian.org> Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Fri, Oct 31, 2008 at 04:55:27PM +0100, Pierre Habouzit wrote: > I've not kept the auto-edit feature of git-revert for the git-cherry-pick -R > case as I don't believe it makes a lot of sense. But if people are unhappy > with that, I can easily "fix" it. I disagree. I write a new commit message for every revert I do. When you cherry-pick, you are pulling a good commit from somewhere else. So its commit message should suffice to explain why you are making the change (and infrequently, you might want to give more context or say "and here is where this comes from"). But when you revert, you are saying "this other commit was bad, so let's reverse it." So you can look at the other commit to see what it did, but you still don't know _why_ it was bad. A revert should always give information about what you know _now_ that you didn't know when you made the commit originally. -Peff