Re: [PATCH v10 3/5] history: add squash subcommand to fold a range

We don't have the luxury of being able to easily roll-back features that
have been merged and are being used in the wider world so need to have a
considered approach to designing new features.

This is fair and an important point since Git is distributed as a
binary. However, I still think there is a balance to be struck.

Hardly anyone who is employed to work on git is given work time to
review random patches that are not of direct interest to their employer,
   the reviews are mostly from people volunteering their own time.
Therefore comparing it to what happens inside a company where it is part
of the job to review others code is not a realistic comparison.

This is very fair and of course makes a lot of sense!

quoted

When you reroll too fast without waiting for reviewers, it
invalidates almost-done-but-yet-unpublished reviews.  If you
repeatedly do so, it exacerbates the problem by discouraging
reviewers from even looking at your topic, as they wonder if a
rapid reroll will invalidate their reviews yet again.

Yes, I've definitely waited a couple of days to see if another iteration
is going to appear before starting a review.

This puts us on a "resonant frequency" since I often finish the work
and then wait a day before sending out. I think there are definitely
cases where rerolling quicker would also be beneficial.

[2]
https://lore.kernel.org/git/ddd0160c-7f4c-41c7-855f-58288db00050@gmail.com (local)

My main opposition to this is two-fold:

1. I don't see the value that the new format would bring; I don't
understand that the proposed format is better than the current one (I
am not sure if I actually understand the new format at all), and Junio
expressed a similar sentiment earlier so I have been counting on this
discussion dying down organically.

2. It's consistent to keep them the same, which is in itself valuable.
And it requires work to implement a new format, so there should be a
good reason to do that, which goes back to my point 1.


Harald