lilypond-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: git-cl is down


From: Carl Sorensen
Subject: Re: git-cl is down
Date: Sat, 16 Jul 2011 19:35:50 -0600

On 7/16/11 5:37 PM, "Graham Percival" <address@hidden> wrote:

> On Sat, Jul 16, 2011 at 05:13:29PM -0600, Carl Sorensen wrote:
>> 
>> IMO, we should be aiming at one commit per Rietveld issue, rather than a
>> series of commits per Rietveld issue.
> 
> That's beside the point, at least as far as I understand it.
> 
> - Bertrand writes some code.
> - Bertrand makes a git commit.  That commit has a nice message, it
>   has his name, etc.
> - Bertrand gets this patch onto Rietveld using git-cl.

More common, patch needs some changes.  So Bertrand makes some changes and
then makes a git commit.  This commit reflects the changes.  Then Bertrand
pushes a new patch set.

This happens a couple of times.

Now Bertrand's repository doesn't have one commit on this branch, he has
three or four commits on his branch.  And the first two or three are not
right -- they haven't passed code review.

The final patch set passes code review.

Graham wants to push this patch set.  But he can't, unless he writes his own
commit message and sets the author.

But if Bertrand has been uploading as he did with his test issue, there are
*3* patches, not *1*.   And the first 2 are not accepted, so we don't want
them in our source tree.  They might even break compiling; if so, they'd
mess up git bisect.

Since we're only ready for committing after getting approval, we need to
combine into a single commit after approval.  Either you can do it (creating
your own metadata, as you said) or he can do it (using git rebase -i).  But
somebody needs to make the change to the commits in order get them ready for
pushing.

Thanks,

Carl




reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]