Change Details

Understood that this is a pretty severe edge-case for a very minor annoyance 1. I merged a longstanding branch which resulted in a merge commit of 512 files (unplanned power of 2, or phab caps at reporting > 512). 2. I used `arc diff` to create a diff of the merge commit. I needed ~2 others to review certain parts of the merge which I was concerned with, which is why I created a diff. 3. I was presented with a note from `arc diff` suggesting that large commits are not a good fit for review. 4. Caution to the wind and continue anyways. 5. Update the merge commit with additional changes/fixes. 6. Update the diff with `arc diff` 7. I was again presented with a note from `arc diff` suggesting that large commits are not a good fit for review. This was only a minor annoyance but assuming that the existing diff is already considered sufficiently large, having the warning repeat seemed unnecessary. There may have been a better way to handle review of the large commit to create small diffs of the areas I was concerned with, but I wasn't able to come up with how to accomplish that due to it being a merge.

Understood that this is a pretty severe edge-case for a very minor annoyance 1. I merged a longstanding branch which resulted in a merge commit of 512 files (unplanned power of 2, or phab caps at reporting > 512). 2. I used `arc diff` to create a diff of the merge commit. I needed ~2 others to review certain parts of the merge which I was concerned with, which is why I created a diff. 3. I was presented with a note from `arc diff` suggesting that large commits are not a good fit for review. 4. Caution to the wind and continue anyways. 5. Update the merge commit with additional changes/fixes. 6. Update the diff with `arc diff` 7. I was again presented with a note from `arc diff` suggesting that large commits are not a good fit for review. This was only a minor annoyance but assuming that the existing diff is already considered sufficiently large, having the warning repeat seemed unnecessary. There may have been a better way to handle review of the large commit to create small diffs of the areas I was concerned with, but I wasn't able to come up with a clean way to accomplish that due to it being a merge.

Understood that this is a pretty severe edge-case for a very minor annoyance 1. I merged a longstanding branch which resulted in a merge commit of 512 files (unplanned power of 2, or phab caps at reporting > 512). 2. I used `arc diff` to create a diff of the merge commit. I needed ~2 others to review certain parts of the merge which I was concerned with, which is why I created a diff. 3. I was presented with a note from `arc diff` suggesting that large commits are not a good fit for review. 4. Caution to the wind and continue anyways. 5. Update the merge commit with additional changes/fixes. 6. Update the diff with `arc diff` 7. I was again presented with a note from `arc diff` suggesting that large commits are not a good fit for review. This was only a minor annoyance but assuming that the existing diff is already considered sufficiently large, having the warning repeat seemed unnecessary. There may have been a better way to handle review of the large commit to create small diffs of the areas I was concerned with, but I wasn't able to come up with howa clean way to accomplish that due to it being a merge.