Recent Features
| |||||||||||||
The git tree is the source codeThe git tree is the source codePosted Nov 10, 2012 16:50 UTC (Sat) by epa (subscriber, #39769)In reply to: The git tree is the source code by pbonzini Parent article: Introducing RedPatch (Ksplice Blog)
I see it the other way round: the actual preferred form of modification is flattened source code.There's some merit in that argument. Even when people do fetch a git tree to modify the code, they don't usually look at the history of past patches but just work on their change based on the state of the code as it is now.
(Log in to post comments)
The git tree is the source code Posted Nov 10, 2012 21:48 UTC (Sat) by apoelstra (subscriber, #75205) [Link]
>There's some merit in that argument. Even when people do fetch a git tree to modify the code, they don't usually look at the history of past patches but just work on their change based on the state of the code as it is now.
Most code I changes to code, it's usually because
(a) I am a project developer, and I need git to keep track of all the work I'm doing, or
The git tree is the source code Posted Nov 15, 2012 12:08 UTC (Thu) by pbonzini (subscriber, #60935) [Link]
> (a) I am a project developer, and I need git to keep track of all the work I'm doing, or
Just use quilt, you do not need the history.
(Devil's advocate, of course---nowadays I'm spoiled by the ease of doing "git init", but I was doing the above a lot in CVS/svn days).
> (b) I am not a project developer, so I'm just doing a small bugfix. Then I'd like 'git log' or 'git blame' to find out where the bug came from.
Nice to have, but definitely not a requirement for modification.
(Not devil's advocate here, I rarely do "git clone" if I'm just fixing something for myself. I just work on top of the Fedora package).
|
|||||||||||||