Contributors mailing list archives
Re: Confusion about branch 9.0 in githubby
On Fri, Nov 13, 2015 at 11:23 AM, <Pedro@pad.odoo-community.org> wrote:
Guewen, about that, I know your preference of splitting too much the commits. I give you my opinion about that: I think you should document this with code comments, not with commits, because the end result is the code. If you download on the AppStore a module, you don't have this commit history to see what you want to reflect.
I would rephrase it to "If you download on the AppStore a module, you better enjoy watching a Walt Disney movie than attempt to install an open source ERP" ;-)
I also think migrations should keep the explanations detailed in the commits regardless of the code comments. Commits can hold much more information than comments. IMHO what is important is enabling the curious developer to find out what has been done during a migration (as Alexandre explained, major version migration is also the unique time window opportunity to break things and do a better design). When you find some strange code, it's also handy to look at git blame (specially on Github) to find possible explanations.
Take a concrete example of a complex module in l10n-brazil migration:
This is so many improvements and changes to migrate to the new API and meet the state of the art OCA standards. I cannot imagine doing a v7 to v8 migration if I could not find these detailed commit somewhere. Specially in this case, meeting the OCA standards (starting from old legacy code) was so hard and long that commits to deal new legal requirements had to be included during the process to support the real projects.
So I think some modules are simple enough to be migrated with just a few commits, some other are not...