Repository navigation
Agree on commit reverting strategy #12979
Description
Activity
FWIW my preference is
1.and2.I was under the impression we always used just
git revert <sha>and then amended the commit message with the reason for revertingReacted by James M Snell and Gibson FahnestockI don't believe I've ever seen us do a multiple commit revert. My preference is definitely
git revert HASHon a single commit at a time with an amended commit message.Reacted by Gibson FahnestockRefs #4679 (comment) from @rvagg :
FYI, we've consistently used the format: Revert "original commit msg" as reversion messages, so even the subsystem prefix goes into the quotes. The tooling we have recognises this format too.
Okay, I think we have consensus, so I'll close this as decided. We use
git revert, and leave the commits as they are.If anyone disagrees then comment/reopen.
Ah..wait, but this practice is still not documented, no?
Reacted by Gibson FahnestockReacted by Gibson Fahnestock@joyeecheung Good point
- added a commit that references this issue
on May 19, 2017 - added a commit that references this issue
on Jun 22, 2017 - added a commit that references this issue
on Jul 11, 2017
The COLLABORATOR_GUIDE doesn't seem to cover how to revert commits, and specifically what the commit message should be. I think we should try to agree what the standard process is.
For single commits with
git revert HASH:node-validate-commit), e.g. fs: Revert throw on invalid callbacks #12976For multiple commits with
git revert FROM...TO: