Re: Wayland backend design

[Sergio L. Pascual]

On Fri, 2016-01-15 at 18:41 +0000, Ivan Vučica wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 7:04 PM Sergio L. Pascual <address@hidden>
> wrote:
> >  
> > Bundling a bunch of changes of a branch into a single one doesn't
> > sound
> > as good, though. That could only mean that you have a really broken
> > commit policy for your git repo, and that you need this to make
> > some
> > sense of it ;-)
> This was mentioned having in mind the approach that people might
> have: commit possibly broken things as you go, keep them on a branch,
> then consider the "pull request" (with 20, 30 smaller commits) as the
> final product. For purposes of GNUstep, however, not a "pull request"
> but a "patch" should be considered the final product. This means "if
> you commonly do pull request, it'd be preferable to squash it first".
> 
> Why? Two reasons:
> 
> - We still use Subversion
>   - your commits will spam watchers and history with many commit
> notifications (e.g. via email or RSS)
>   - or they will get squashed (which watchers will probably prefer)
> 
> - I would like to use Gerrit to review your changes.
>   - Gerrit has a concept of a 'change' (approximately, one Subversion
> commit or Github/Bitbucket/pick_code_hosting_site pull request)
>   - Each change track the history of the change as it is being
> reviewed
>   - Each item in the history is called a 'patch set' (approximately,
> full diff from the base commit -- think 'squashed development
> history')
> 

OK, now I see your point.

Sergio.