On 2020-06-21 18:49, Andreas Krey wrote:
On Sun, 21 Jun 2020 18:34:30 +0000, Johnny Billquist wrote: ...That is what literally the word "commit" means. Until that point, you are not committed.Please excuse me for not getting that, with 'committing', you don't mean creating git commits in the context of talking about git. I mean, that you don't 'commit' things that aren't reviewed, is blindingly obvious. Whether you do reviews before doing a 'git commit' is not.
Ok. One final time:In the end, the code lives somewhere central, from where everyone gets the code. Committing code to this repository is the only thing that matters, and that is what I am talking about the whole time. What the exact terminology is used in a specific tool is irrelevant. You need to understand the concept, and talk about that irrespective of what it is called in your tool. Since different tools have different terminology anyway, it is not useful, ever, to to talk about general concepts using a specific tools terminology. If you can't see that, it's not my problem.
This whole thread is not purely about git, but also how to deal with different problems and issues, partly in relationship with git, but not based on git.
And I have absolutely no interest in trying to convince you that git sucks.You didn't even start with that. You just continued to claim that it doesn't work in some unspecified way.
Well. You haven't presented any proof that git even works in the first place. So I think I can rest easy on that one.
... the true believers.I don't care about them. They're not helpful.
You certainly come across as one of them. And you're about equally as helpful.
Now I'm truly done. Please remove me as a recipient of any more mails on this thread.
Johnny
--
Johnny Billquist || "I'm on a bus
|| on a psychedelic trip
email: bqt%softjar.se@localhost || Reading murder books
pdp is alive! || tryin' to stay hip" - B. Idol