Fossil SCM
Minor edits to Rebase Considered Harmful, for clarity.
Commit
a2ea815183932d79f33f8214dd4d13442169ab7710f0aee5c67628023deff9fa
Parent
4f79941f9e05845…
1 file changed
+12
-11
+12
-11
| --- www/rebaseharm.md | ||
| +++ www/rebaseharm.md | ||
| @@ -204,23 +204,24 @@ | ||
| 204 | 204 | editing. This is the camp that uses tools like rebase and filter-branch |
| 205 | 205 | to tell the story in the way that’s best for future readers."_ |
| 206 | 206 | |
| 207 | 207 | I reject this argument utterly. |
| 208 | 208 | Unless you project is a work of fiction, it is not a "story" but a "history". |
| 209 | -Honorable writers (of non-fiction) adjust their narrative to fit | |
| 210 | -history. Rebase, in contrast, adjusts history to fit the narrative. | |
| 211 | -I call that being dishonest. | |
| 209 | +Honorable writers adjust their narrative to fit | |
| 210 | +history. Rebase adjusts history to fit the narrative. | |
| 212 | 211 | |
| 213 | -This is not to say that historical texts cannot be redrafted for clarity | |
| 214 | -and accuracy. Fossil supports this by providing mechanisms to fix | |
| 215 | -typos in check-in comments, and make other editorial changes, by adding | |
| 212 | +Truthful texts can be redrafted for clarity and accuracy. | |
| 213 | +Fossil supports this by providing mechanisms to fix | |
| 214 | +typos in check-in comments, attach supplemental notes, | |
| 215 | +and make other editorial changes. | |
| 216 | +The corrections are accomplished by adding | |
| 216 | 217 | new modification records to the blockchain. The original incorrect |
| 217 | -inputs are preserved as part of the blockchain and are easily | |
| 218 | -accessible, but for routine display purposes, a more readable | |
| 219 | -presentation is provided. Thus, the repository need not be your first | |
| 220 | -and only draft, but can also be true and historically correct at the | |
| 221 | -same time. | |
| 218 | +inputs are preserved in the blockchain and are easily accessible. | |
| 219 | +But for routine display purposes, the more readable edited | |
| 220 | +presentation is provided. A repository can be a true and accurate | |
| 221 | +representation of history even without getting everything perfect | |
| 222 | +on the first draft. | |
| 222 | 223 | |
| 223 | 224 | Unfortunately, Git does not provide the ability to add corrections |
| 224 | 225 | or clarifications to historical check-ins in its blockchain. Hence, |
| 225 | 226 | once again, rebase can be seen as an attempt to work around limitations |
| 226 | 227 | of Git. Wouldn't it be better to fix the tool rather that to lie about |
| 227 | 228 |
| --- www/rebaseharm.md | |
| +++ www/rebaseharm.md | |
| @@ -204,23 +204,24 @@ | |
| 204 | editing. This is the camp that uses tools like rebase and filter-branch |
| 205 | to tell the story in the way that’s best for future readers."_ |
| 206 | |
| 207 | I reject this argument utterly. |
| 208 | Unless you project is a work of fiction, it is not a "story" but a "history". |
| 209 | Honorable writers (of non-fiction) adjust their narrative to fit |
| 210 | history. Rebase, in contrast, adjusts history to fit the narrative. |
| 211 | I call that being dishonest. |
| 212 | |
| 213 | This is not to say that historical texts cannot be redrafted for clarity |
| 214 | and accuracy. Fossil supports this by providing mechanisms to fix |
| 215 | typos in check-in comments, and make other editorial changes, by adding |
| 216 | new modification records to the blockchain. The original incorrect |
| 217 | inputs are preserved as part of the blockchain and are easily |
| 218 | accessible, but for routine display purposes, a more readable |
| 219 | presentation is provided. Thus, the repository need not be your first |
| 220 | and only draft, but can also be true and historically correct at the |
| 221 | same time. |
| 222 | |
| 223 | Unfortunately, Git does not provide the ability to add corrections |
| 224 | or clarifications to historical check-ins in its blockchain. Hence, |
| 225 | once again, rebase can be seen as an attempt to work around limitations |
| 226 | of Git. Wouldn't it be better to fix the tool rather that to lie about |
| 227 |
| --- www/rebaseharm.md | |
| +++ www/rebaseharm.md | |
| @@ -204,23 +204,24 @@ | |
| 204 | editing. This is the camp that uses tools like rebase and filter-branch |
| 205 | to tell the story in the way that’s best for future readers."_ |
| 206 | |
| 207 | I reject this argument utterly. |
| 208 | Unless you project is a work of fiction, it is not a "story" but a "history". |
| 209 | Honorable writers adjust their narrative to fit |
| 210 | history. Rebase adjusts history to fit the narrative. |
| 211 | |
| 212 | Truthful texts can be redrafted for clarity and accuracy. |
| 213 | Fossil supports this by providing mechanisms to fix |
| 214 | typos in check-in comments, attach supplemental notes, |
| 215 | and make other editorial changes. |
| 216 | The corrections are accomplished by adding |
| 217 | new modification records to the blockchain. The original incorrect |
| 218 | inputs are preserved in the blockchain and are easily accessible. |
| 219 | But for routine display purposes, the more readable edited |
| 220 | presentation is provided. A repository can be a true and accurate |
| 221 | representation of history even without getting everything perfect |
| 222 | on the first draft. |
| 223 | |
| 224 | Unfortunately, Git does not provide the ability to add corrections |
| 225 | or clarifications to historical check-ins in its blockchain. Hence, |
| 226 | once again, rebase can be seen as an attempt to work around limitations |
| 227 | of Git. Wouldn't it be better to fix the tool rather that to lie about |
| 228 |