As I said, there points to be made for both ways. Honestly, this is the more difficult approach because I have to break things down to incremental changes. That makes it easier for people to review than just pushing the new files with all of the changes already in place, but if that's what people prefer, I'd be glad to do that.

Your approach makes it easier to review changed lines, yes.
But it makes it nearly impossible to review what isn't changed.
I know some reviewers prefer that, simply because it means
less work for them. One can rubber stamp the first commit and
blame the process if problems sneak in.

Please note, I haven't seen any datasheet from AMD yet, so I'll
probably never be able to +2 any of this. I just care about it
because I often try to maintain things across the tree and
would probably give up if the only commit message I can find
says nothing but "transparency, yeah!". It's very hard to work
with the copy-pasta code base that our AMD stuff is, you can
never tell by the Git history if a piece of code actually works
on the platform you are looking at (or was even meant to be
ever run on it).

View Change

To view, visit change 32407. To unsubscribe, or for help writing mail filters, visit settings.