Talk:Changeset

Untitled

Does anyone know when the term 'changeset' first appeared? It seems that the term is used often in the distributed SCM tools world (Git, Bazaar, Bitkeeper) but hardly at all in the repository-based world. This suggests that the term may have been used first in connection with BitKeeper - but is that true? Dave b13754 (talk) 18:26, 29 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Changeset. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100115230528/http://mercurial.selenic.com:80/wiki/ChangeSet to http://mercurial.selenic.com/wiki/ChangeSet

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:58, 19 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Changeset. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:09, 2 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Add section about changeset conventions

There are various conventions related to changesets such as making them small. That convention is currently explained at Atomic commit#Atomic commit convention. I think it would make sense to merge that section into this article. What do you think about this?

--push-f (talk) 18:13, 20 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Kop: Pinging you since you very recently added such information to the Version control article. I think it would make sense to document conventions regarding changesets in a single section on the Changeset article. So I suggest that we merge your newly added Version control#Best Practices here, along with the best practices about commit messages you added to Version control#Common terminology (ideally with some sources). What do you think about this plan? --push-f (talk) 19:42, 20 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Push-f: My initial thought is that it is more useful to have the Version control#Best Practices in a single place, and since there are best practices related to version control (branching comes to mind, perhaps tag uses, probably others) that don't involve changesets that place is in the Version Control article. In which case the thing to do is to link from the Changeset article back to the Version Control Best practices section. Particulars about best practices (probably?) depend what other features the revision control system as a whole provides, making me think that a holistic view is best.

I also question how much verbiage about metadata belongs in the changeset article, being that the metadata is arguably not part of the changeset itself. Similar to inodes and file data; are they 2 separate things? At one level yes, at another, no. Having said that, I don't see a problem with repeating the Version control#Common terminology Commit message verbiage in the Changeset article. (You will find plenty of supporting references for this wording in Version control#Best Practices.) --kop (talk) 02:51, 22 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Push-f: I went and frobbed the article, not really liking the existing sentences. And added an abbreviated Best practices section. --kop (talk) 04:34, 22 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]