IMO, it depends on how extensive the changes are. Eventually we certainly prefer the rebase and force push approach . However, if the PR is complex and a lot of changes have been made, it can be helpful to temporarily add a commitment (which will be squashed later) to help the reviewer see what has changed.
I'll let others also chime in with their thoughts. On Fri, Aug 10, 2018, 4:36 AM Stamatis Zampetakis <zabe...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi, > > Contributing to Calcite is quite well documented in the website ( > https://calcite.apache.org/develop/#contributing). One minor thing that > might be missing is how to update the pull request when changes are > required by the reviewers. > > Personally, I always perform rebase followed by a forced push in an attempt > to always keep the PR with one commit. However, this may make the changes > more difficult to review. > > 1. Is there a preferred way to handle updates in PRs? > 2. Should we update the site with a few extra lines documenting this > case? > > Best, > Stamatis >
