On Mon, 22 Apr 2013 22:46:14 +0000 (UTC) Duncan <1i5t5.dun...@cox.net> wrote:
> Alexis Ballier posted on Mon, 22 Apr 2013 15:40:33 +0200 as excerpted: > > > "Having functional changes mixed with whitespace/cosmetics in a single > > commit makes it hard to read and understand." > > > >> Also, in this case I see only one extra hunk. > >> But once we have proper tools (like git) we can revisit this. > > > > I don't see how git helps. You'll have to commit twice then push, vs > > commit twice with cvs. > > But git commits are quite lightweight, while as someone already pointed > out, cvs commits, if done properly with repoman, are anything but. > > So at least in the sense that it'll be less hassle, two git commits > followed by a push should be much easier than two repoman and cvs commits. Just to make it clear -- there are four CVS commits. Ebuild commit followed by GPG-signed Manifest commit. Hopefully the developer has persistent SSH connections set up. -- Best regards, Michał Górny
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
