Re: [Gnu-arch-users] "tla commit" generates a patch-set even if there are no changes

[Julian T. J. Midgley]

In article <address@hidden>,
Aaron Bentley  <address@hidden> wrote:
>Robert Widhopf-Fenk wrote:
>
>>>If you want that, you can use the precommit hook to prevent it from 
>>>committing when there are no changes.
>> 
>> This is cool, everyday I learn some more nifty tla features ;c)
>> 
>> But, still agreeing also to the others, that the default
>> IMHO is not chosen wisely.  tla is strict w.r.to empty logs,
>> i.e. it will not let me commit if there were no changes in
>> the log.  So I expect it to be strict here too.
>
>Perhaps you could explain why the defaults are unwise?  What's the harm 
>in an accidental empty commit, aside from a little embarassment?

Conversely, perhaps you could explain the benefits?  So far, I see
none (provided --force is available to allow the commit when it is
needed).

Why not go the whole hog and permit people to commit with empty log files?

Julian
-- 
Julian T. J. Midgley                       http://www.xenoclast.org/
Cambridge, England.
PGP: BCC7863F FP: 52D9 1750 5721 7E58 C9E1  A7D5 3027 2F2E BCC7 863F