Open Stack

On 08/05/2014 10:51 AM, ZZelle wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> 
> I like the idea  ... with complex change, it could useful for the
> understanding to split it into smaller changes during development.

I don't understand this.  If it's a complex change that you need
multiple commits to keep track of locally, why wouldn't reviewers want
the same thing?  Squashing a bunch of commits together solely so you
have one review for Gerrit isn't a good thing.  Is it just the warning
message that git-review prints when you try to push multiple commits
that is the problem here?

> 
> 
> Do we need to expose such feature under git review? we could define a new
> subcommand? git reviewflow?
> 
> 
> Cédric,
> ZZelle at IRC
> 
> 
> 
> On Tue, Aug 5, 2014 at 4:49 PM, Ryan Brown <rybrown at redhat.com> wrote:
> 
>>
>>
>> On 08/05/2014 09:27 AM, Sylvain Bauza wrote:
>>>
>>> Le 05/08/2014 13:06, Ryan Brown a écrit :
>>> -1 to this as git-review default behaviour. Ideally, branches should be
>>> identical in between Gerrit and local Git.
>>
>> Probably not as default behaviour (people who don't want that workflow
>> would be driven mad!), but I think enough folks would want it that it
>> should be available as an option.
>>
>>> I can understand some exceptions where developers want to work on
>>> intermediate commits and squash them before updating Gerrit, but in that
>>> case, I can't see why it needs to be kept locally. If a new patchset has
>>> to be done on patch A, then the local branch can be rebased
>>> interactively on last master, edit patch A by doing an intermediate
>>> patch, then squash the change, and pick the later patches (B to E)
>>>
>>> That said, I can also understand that developers work their way, and so
>>> could dislike squashing commits, hence my proposal to have a --no-squash
>>> option when uploading, but use with caution (for a single branch, how
>>> many dependencies are outdated in Gerrit because developers work on
>>> separate branches for each single commit while they could work locally
>>> on a single branch ? I can't iimagine how often errors could happen if
>>> we don't force by default to squash commits before sending them to
>> Gerrit)
>>>
>>> -Sylvain
>>>
>>>> Cheers,
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> OpenStack-dev mailing list
>>> OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org
>>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>>
>> I am well aware this may be straying into feature creep territory, and
>> it wouldn't be terrible if this weren't implemented.
>>
>> --
>> Ryan Brown / Software Engineer, Openstack / Red Hat, Inc.
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> OpenStack-dev mailing list
>> OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org
>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>>
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> OpenStack-dev mailing list
> OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>