Re: Issue 4550: Avoid "using namespace std; " in included files (Take 2) (issue 579240043 by address@hidden)

[jonas . hahnfeld]

On 2020/01/24 15:32:43, hanwenn wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 24, 2020 at 4:26 PM <mailto:address@hidden> wrote:
> >
> > On 2020/01/24 13:57:33, Dan Eble wrote:
> > > On 2020/01/24 13:45:50, dak wrote:
> > > > Hoo yes.  That kind of extensive change is going to hurt anyway
> > given the
> > > > current burst activity level.  It will likely suck either way. 
Do
> > you have
> > > > particular dependencies yourself, Dan?
> > >
> > > I have a bunch of private branches (contexts, rehearsal marks,
warning
> > clean-up)
> > > that I would like to get on with rebasing.  Normally, once I'm
pretty
> > sure that
> > > a change of mine will be pushed, I'll just rebase to it locally,
but
> > with this
> > > one, I don't want to start until it's in master.
> > >
> > > If you want help handling Han-Wen's patches tomorrow, you can
delegate
> > some to
> > > me.
> >
> > Well, I should be able to handle them well enough.  It would be
> > preferable if Han-Wen would provide Git-formatted patches (Rietveld
is
> > missing out on commit messages unless you consider scooping them up
from
> > the description as such, and while I would make sure that issue
numbers
> > are in the title lines, I think future rebases/merges at least for
> > Han-Wen himself would work better if I work from original commits
rather
> > than original diffs).  And then it makes little sense distributing
those
> > patches to more than one person.
> 
> this goes back to what we discussed in Salzburg, namely that our
> tooling is clumsy. Having a gerrit or GH/GL based workflow would let
> us review and exchange diffs as native Git commits, which simplifies a
> lot of things.
> 
> I'm happy to push my stuff to some git branch somewhere, if that helps
you.

I wasn't in Salzburg, but why can't you push to staging as everybody
else does? It's not harder than pushing to a random branch and you
obviously have all commits locally, don't you?

> BTW, Why do we insist in associating each review with a http://sf.net
issue,
> even if there is no related bug?

I think there's no initial message for a new patch here, so there needs
to be a place where new patches go and others can see them.

https://codereview.appspot.com/579240043/