[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: makelsr

From: David Kastrup
Subject: Re: makelsr
Date: Fri, 28 Dec 2018 19:31:00 +0100
User-agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.0.50 (gnu/linux)

James Lowe <address@hidden> writes:

> David,
> On 28/12/2018 14:13, David Kastrup wrote:
>> Thomas Morley <address@hidden> writes:
>>> Hi all,
>>> I think we need some guidelines in the case a new lsr-snippet is used
>>> for the docs.
>>> See
>>> James askes not to run makelsr, because a plethora of changes will
>>> clutter the patch-set.
>>> OTOH, a patch can't stand alone and can't be applied for testings by
>>> reviewers without makelsr. So I voted for doing makelsr.
>>> The CG is not clear in this regard (or I didn't understand it)
>>> So how to deal with it?
>> The best way to do that in my opinion is to do both.  Have the makelsr
>> changeset as a separate commit (and review changeset) but commit as a
>> single merge commit, by merging a branch that contains the intermediate
>> commits that would not compile on their own.
> For my ignorance, what happens if one wanted to cherry pick the the
> 'single merge commit' - wouldn't it be better to have two separate
> commits?

I don't understand your question.  You'll have one commit for the manual
change, one commit for the automatic change, and one merge commit
bringing both changes into the main line.

You can cherry-pick any of the three.

David Kastrup

reply via email to

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