Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom

git-town: 7.2.0 -> 7.3.0 #84080

Merged
merged 1 commit into from Apr 2, 2020
Merged

git-town: 7.2.0 -> 7.3.0 #84080

merged 1 commit into from Apr 2, 2020

Conversation

jonringer
Copy link
Contributor

@jonringer jonringer commented Apr 2, 2020 •
edited

Motivation for this change

just going through r-ryantm logs

Things done
  • Tested using sandboxing (nix.useSandbox on NixOS, or option sandbox in nix.conf on non-NixOS linux)
  • Built on platform(s)
    • NixOS
    • macOS
    • other Linux distributions
  • Tested via one or more NixOS test(s) if existing and applicable for the change (look inside nixos/tests)
  • Tested compilation of all pkgs that depend on this change using nix-shell -p nixpkgs-review --run "nixpkgs-review wip"
  • Tested execution of all binary files (usually in ./result/bin/)
  • Determined the impact on package closure size (by running nix path-info -S before and after)
  • Ensured that relevant documentation is up to date
  • Fits CONTRIBUTING.md.
https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/pull/84080
1 package built:
git-town

@ofborg ofborg bot requested a review from allonsy April 2, 2020 07:34
jollheef
jollheef suggested changes Apr 2, 2020
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Member

@jollheef jollheef left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Should a cosmetic change of the code be in a separate commit?

@alyssais alyssais merged commit 931f3a7 into NixOS:master Apr 2, 2020
@alyssais
Copy link
Member

alyssais commented Apr 2, 2020

Should a cosmetic change of the code be in a separate commit?

It’s clear enough from the message what changed, I think. (And theres always -w)

@jollheef
Copy link
Member

jollheef commented Apr 2, 2020

Should a cosmetic change of the code be in a separate commit?

It’s clear enough from the message what changed, I think. (And theres always -w)

It's not only about "what changed", but also because it makes git revert, git blame and git bisect less useful. So that's why usually in development it's considered as a bad practice.

@jonringer
Copy link
Contributor Author

Should a cosmetic change of the code be in a separate commit?

It’s clear enough from the message what changed, I think. (And theres always -w)

It's not only about "what changed", but also because it makes git revert, git blame and git bisect less useful. So that's why usually in development it's considered as a bad practice.

I was just making it look like most other expressions. Which won't have much of an effect. You could argue that it should have been corrected on the initial commit.

@jonringer jonringer deleted the bump-git-town branch April 2, 2020 16:47
@alyssais
Copy link
Member

alyssais commented Apr 2, 2020 via email

@jollheef
Copy link
Member

jollheef commented Apr 2, 2020

I don't see how it meaningfully interferes with revert or bisect

If you need to revert, you cannot revert only functional changes, but you'll also revert refactoring.

@alyssais
Copy link
Member

alyssais commented Apr 26, 2020 via email

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@jollheef jollheef jollheef requested changes

@allonsy allonsy Awaiting requested review from allonsy

Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
10.rebuild-darwin: 1-10 10.rebuild-darwin: 1 10.rebuild-linux: 1-10 10.rebuild-linux: 1
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet
3 participants
@jonringer @alyssais @jollheef