[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Half-baked unused features.
From: |
David Kastrup |
Subject: |
Re: Half-baked unused features. |
Date: |
Sun, 15 Aug 2010 17:14:20 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.0.50 (gnu/linux) |
Carl Sorensen <address@hidden> writes:
> On 8/15/10 7:39 AM, "David Kastrup" <address@hidden> wrote:
>
>> Carl Sorensen <address@hidden> writes:
>>
>>> On 8/15/10 6:48 AM, "David Kastrup" <address@hidden> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> IMO, getting rid of bit-rotted code is always a good idea.
>>>
>>>> Should it
>>>> be wrapped in a full review process?
>>>
>>> I think so. The full review process for removing old stuff is
>>> generally very short and sweet (post the patch, somebody important
>>> says OK), so I don't think it hurts a bit to do it.
>>
>> It only involves creating a separate branch, moving the change there,
>> removing the change from all ongoing development in related areas
>> (and/or postponing work on them until the review process of the bitrot
>> change has come to a close), creating a Rietveld issue, uploading the
>> changes to Rietveld, monitoring all progress on it, repeating a full
>> regtest for any proposed modifications and juggling with
>> merge/cherry-pick while doing the parallel development and so on.
>
> No, you said it was all in one commit. So you have a branch with that
> commit and you keep rebasing it. It's quite easy to do. And you don't have
> to eliminate the change from the ongoing development in the related area; if
> you're confident it's worth eliminating then eliminate it in your
> development work.
The development work should go up to Rietveld, the cleanup should go up
to Rietveld. git-cl can associate only one review per branch. So I
need to fork out the cleanup from the middle of the branch. Possibly by
rebasing it to the tip of the branch and then creating a branch from
HEAD~1, cherrypicking HEAD. No wait, more likely to the bottom and then
just labelling a new branch there. Whatever. I'll figure it out.
--
David Kastrup
- Half-baked unused features., David Kastrup, 2010/08/15
- Re: Half-baked unused features., Carl Sorensen, 2010/08/15
- Re: Half-baked unused features., David Kastrup, 2010/08/15
- Re: Half-baked unused features., Carl Sorensen, 2010/08/15
- Re: Half-baked unused features., David Kastrup, 2010/08/15
- Re: Half-baked unused features., Carl Sorensen, 2010/08/15
- Re: Half-baked unused features., David Kastrup, 2010/08/15
- Re: Half-baked unused features., Graham Percival, 2010/08/15
- Re: Half-baked unused features., David Kastrup, 2010/08/15
- Re: Half-baked unused features., Graham Percival, 2010/08/15
- Re: Half-baked unused features.,
David Kastrup <=
- Re: Half-baked unused features., David Kastrup, 2010/08/15
- Re: Half-baked unused features., Carl Sorensen, 2010/08/15
- Re: Half-baked unused features., David Kastrup, 2010/08/15
- Review: remove markup function aliasing mechanism (was: Half-baked unused features.), David Kastrup, 2010/08/15
- Review: start work on markup doc and code (was: Half-baked unused features.), David Kastrup, 2010/08/15
- Re: Half-baked unused features., David Kastrup, 2010/08/15
- Re: Half-baked unused features., Carl Sorensen, 2010/08/15
- Re: Half-baked unused features., David Kastrup, 2010/08/15
- git merge drivers (was: Half-baked unused features.), Ralf Wildenhues, 2010/08/16
- Re: Half-baked unused features., Graham Percival, 2010/08/15