=?utf-8?q?José?= L. Junior <josejun...@10xengineers.ai>,taalhaataahir0102 <23100...@lums.edu.pk>, =?utf-8?q?José?= L. Junior <josejun...@10xengineers.ai>, =?utf-8?q?José?= L. Junior <josejun...@10xengineers.ai>,taalhaataahir0102 <23100...@lums.edu.pk> Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <llvm.org/llvm/llvm-project/pull/69...@github.com>
DavidSpickett wrote: > This is what going to happen right? But than how we will be able to see which > changes are made by the individuals? 🤔 And whats the purpose of squashing 🤔 So the only way to keep that level of detail is to do all your changes as individual commits from each author. While that could be done... llvm-project does not allow (with some minor exceptions) folks to land sets of commits from a PR without squashing them first. the general expected thing is that you have one initial commit, and a lot of fixup commits on top of that responding to comments. When that's landed it gets squashed into one commit and the PR's message is used as the commit message. The purpose of squashing right now is mostly because you're at a point where you know it all works, and squashing them all down will give a nice clean base to start the proper review with. Folks will inevitably ask for some changes, and you won't be managing 7+N fixup commits. If there were something, let's say, uncertain in one of the fixup commits, I'd tell you not to squash it until reviewers had debated it. I don't see anything like that here. So it's not required as it'll happen before landing anyway, but if you want to manage a smaller stack of commits it can help. It's a judgement call. Sometimes reviewers will surprise you, so you can always keep a copy of the original branch locally just in case. Which means that yes, the final commit is one commit with 2 authors. And that's the most detail that git will track in that form. If you work on a different project that allows rebasing or merge commits, you may be able to keep the history of who added what. If you want to add a sentence or two to describe what aspects were tackled by whom, you can do so (in addition to the co-author tag), but the content of that is up to you. For instance I saw a patch the other day that was like "tests from X, improved implementation from review Y, I added docs on top and cleaned it up". Keep it brief, we don't need an item by item breakdown. As far as llvm-project is concerned, as long as multiple authors are noted in some way, that's fine. https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/69422 _______________________________________________ lldb-commits mailing list lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
