At Wed, 13 May 2020 21:30:29 +0200, Joerg Sonnenberger <[email protected]> wrote: Subject: Re: ongoing git vs hg (was: github.com/NetBSD/src 5 days old?) > > On Wed, May 13, 2020 at 12:21:50PM -0700, Greg A. Woods wrote: > > At Wed, 13 May 2020 14:14:16 +0200, Joerg Sonnenberger <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > I have no idea what the OP is talking about. Mercurial doesn't have pull > > > requests, neither does git BTW. So this is about some specific web UI or > > > review tool, but I don't even know which one. > > > > Consider "pull request" to stand in for _any_ kind of workflow and > > mechanism that third parties would use to submit changes along with the > > recorded existing metadata for those changes, to the upstream project's > > repository. > > The statement still makes no sense at all. Nothing forces you to fold > all incremental steps into a single changeset.
Some workflows clearly do force squashing of commits into a single one
(even in git-only projects or hg-only projects), else Kun wouldn't have
written what he did, and I wouldn't be wondering as well.
So thus the question remains: What will NetBSD's workflow be? Will it
be compatible with merging a set of changes from a third party in much
the manner of what's typically called a "pull request" in the Git
(github, gitlab, etc., etc., etc.) world, and especially in a way that
avoids squashing a branch into a single commit (thus losing commit
metadata)?
--
Greg A. Woods <[email protected]>
Kelowna, BC +1 250 762-7675 RoboHack <[email protected]>
Planix, Inc. <[email protected]> Avoncote Farms <[email protected]>
pgpnDI5pUiRCT.pgp
Description: OpenPGP Digital Signature
