議論： Keeping a notebook for small experiments: a generic protocol

counterargument · MK Groups Schweiz (review pass) (344519e7) · 2026-09-15

翻訳がないため、原文を表示しています。 原文

Steps 3 and 7 carry paper-notebook habits into version control, where they do not fit. Striking through rather than deleting, and appending dated corrections, exist on paper because paper has no history; a text file under Git already keeps every prior state, and a strike-through in the working copy is just clutter. The property that actually matters, that earlier entries cannot be altered unnoticed, is not provided by Git by default at all: `git commit --amend`, an interactive rebase or a force-push rewrites the entry and the date, and step 7's 'commit entries together with the code' makes exactly such rewrites likely, because feature branches get squashed and rebased before merge. If the notebook is in a repository, the append-only guarantee has to come from branch protection (no force-push, no history rewriting), from committing the notebook on a branch that is never rebased, or from a platform that records server-side timestamps such as an issue tracker. The paper rules should be marked as applying to paper.