svn commit: r289664 - head/sys/kern

[Ed Maste]

On 20 October 2015 at 16:42, Bryan Drewery <bdrewery at freebsd.org> wrote:
>
> I really think we should just do a full revert and recommit in these
> cases, and not even a forced commit.  Neither this commit or a forced
> commit will show in 'svn blame' or even during a bisect.  It really just
> becomes luck to find the right commit noting the message.  IMHO 'svn
> blame' is more important than some extra churn in 'svn log' or email. It
> does add more steps in 'svn blame' but it ends up giving the right
> message more obviously.
>
> I'm not asking to redo this commit now, but I think we should have a
> standard of just recommitting to fix mistakes.

This is the approach taken by LLVM and it works well there. You're
right that it introduces a bit of churn but I think it's worth the
cost.