On 2016-01-23 9:37 PM, Boris Zbarsky wrote:
On 1/23/16 2:41 PM, Ehsan Akhgari wrote:
FWIW, option 3 is basically my usual workflow
Option 3, or option 2?
Just to recap, option 3 is that I write patches for bug A and bug B in
that order in my tree (A, then B) and ask for review on both. They are
independent. I get review on B first, but wait for review on A before
landing them both.
Option 2 is that I write patches for bug A and bug B in that order in my
tree (A, then B) and ask for review on both. They are independent. I get
review on B first, reorder the commits and land B, while still waiting
for review on A.
I suspect you're doing option 2 as your usual workflow, not 3.
Yeah sorry, I meant to say option 2. Thanks for correcting me!
Many times I also have to do this because it's unclear which reviewer
will review first, and serializing the review requests in the order in
which the commits appear in my repo will make the process of landing
code take too long.
Precisely why option 3 is the worst. ;)
Agreed.
_______________________________________________
dev-platform mailing list
dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform
