What is meta? ×
Meta Stack Exchange is where users like you discuss bugs, features, and support issues that affect the software powering all 127 Stack Exchange communities.

I read VonC's answer to my question right from its publication. He edited his answer about 5 minutes after his first edit.

The version control system makes it very hard to see what has been changed in the version history.

Please, give each independent edit its own tab in the version history.

SO includes edits at the moment to one history instance if you have edited files in a short time period. This behavior should be changed.

share|improve this question

closed as off topic by Jeff Atwood Jul 3 '09 at 2:23

Questions on Meta Stack Exchange are expected to relate to the software that powers the Stack Exchange network within the scope defined by the community. Consider editing the question or leaving comments for improvement if you believe the question can be reworded to fit within the scope. Read more about reopening questions here.If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.

add comment

2 Answers

I think that this behavior is a byproduct of counting all edits in a five-minute window as one edit. This feature was created because there was a common pattern of quickly answering a question with two or three sentenced and maybe a link. Then the user would immediately edit their answer with more detail, and also correct typos and other errors.

The problem comes when you factor in the fact that a post rolls over to Community Wiki after 5(?) edits from the original author. Since it's very easy to make these 5 edits in the initial period of 'forming' the post, people wanted a way to retain ownership and reputation from these posts. The solution has been collapsing all edits within a 5-minute window into 1 edit.

If it's possible to retain the multiple-edits-count-as-one feature and still have a revision entry for each edit, then I support this feature request.

share|improve this answer
    
Perhaps have the edits within 5 minutes not count towards the total that make the post CW? –  ChrisF Jun 30 '09 at 15:17
    
Right. It would be trickier to implement, but it would make the revision list better to use. –  Kyle Cronin Jun 30 '09 at 15:19
1  
I'm sure it was also mentioned somewhere (by Mr Atwood) that the each revision is a new full copy of the markup in the database, so tracking the first 5 minutes would increase the size of the database a fair bit.. –  dbr Jun 30 '09 at 15:22
    
@Kyle: I support your last point in your answer. –  Masi Jun 30 '09 at 15:34
    
the edits within the 5 minute interval DO NOT COUNT and NEVER HAVE COUNTED toward the CW threshold. –  Jeff Atwood Jul 1 '09 at 6:16
    
Sorry, I stand corrected. However, what was the reason for merging all edits in a 5-minute window, because I KNOW it wasn't always like that. –  Kyle Cronin Jul 1 '09 at 14:16
    
@Kyle: it worked that way since at least last Sept. - i mentioned it in a FAQ entry at that time. I can't really recall a time when it didn't work that way... –  Shog9 Jul 3 '09 at 4:11
add comment

I don't see this as much of a problem, those little edits are limited by the captcha system and rarely contain much actual content change.

I would rather less noise and complexity over having this fine grained detail.

share|improve this answer
add comment