Re: [PATCH 1/2] commit-graph: add trace2 instrumentation for generation DFS

[Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>]

Kristofer Karlsson <krka@spotify.com> writes:

> I've been pondering this dilemma for a bit. I agree with Taylor
> that atomic commits are valuable and I quite like proving the bug
> exists before fixing it.

I do not quite understand.  Even if you fix the code and add a
passing test, the commit remains atomic.  With an artificial
split, you only increase your commit count while making the changes
harder to review.  When grouping a code fix with a newly passing
test:

  * "git show" displays both the implementation changes and the
    test.  You can review both, and if you agree with the behavior
    expected by the test, the change is complete.

  * If the pre-fix behavior is unclear, it is easy to check by
    running:

      $ git show ':!t/' | git apply -R && make test

    This demonstrates exactly how the unfixed code breaks on the
    new test.

> Too late for this round, but I might give that a try in the future
> if I run into a similar scenario again.

The existing tooling already supports this workflow (as demonstrated
by the command above).  Please avoid artificially making the context
larger, as doing so increases the likelihood of merge conflicts with
other changes.