Re: Rietveld workflow problems

[David Kastrup]

Peekay Ex <address@hidden> writes:

> Hello,
>
> On Wed, Sep 21, 2011 at 9:35 AM, address@hidden
> <address@hidden> wrote:
>>
>> For what it's worth, I run into the same problem from time to time -
>> I recently sent an e-mail to the list about a 1-line patch to fix
>> kneed beams that I needed to apply for other work.
>
> So, and this is a genuine question, why do you need to make a tiny
> patch so that a (next) larger patch works. Why not include the tiny
> patch in your larger patch (if that makes sense)?

Because it doesn't make sense to combine unrelated patches in that
manner.  You can't find them in the history then, and if the large patch
gets applied or reverted, the independent small patch has to go along.

> And without wishing to sound rude rude, are we just blaming the tool
> here for 'your preference' of work flow?

I prefer not editing tarballs as a means of source control, so git comes
in quite handy.  Of _course_ it is the task of tools to support
preferable work flows.  Now "generally preferable" is more important
than "individually preferred", and the list is the place where one would
argue the general merit of one's preferences.

So rude or not, I don't see the point in chastising Mike for explaining
his personal preferences and their reasons to the discussion.

If there is any fault to be found, it would be mine for starting this
thread.

-- 
David Kastrup