On Thu, Sep 25, 2014 at 2:28 PM, Jed Brown <j...@jedbrown.org> wrote:
> Paul Hargrove <phhargr...@lbl.gov> writes: > > The GUIs for things like browsing commits, viewing diffs, etc are pretty > > similar in capability and each is sufficiently intuitive (after a brief > > learning curve) that I don't find I need any conscious effort to "mode > > switch" between their use. The ability to comment on commits in lieu of > > the ticket system is a good feature, for instance, that "just works" in > > both systems. > > One concern is that those commits appearing in the release repository > won't have the comments from the development repository. So if you use > the comments and pull requests for debugging and discussion, you would > be better off with one repository so that you don't have to keep > switching repositories (in your browser) to access that metadata. > Jed as a good point there (about comments and pull-request discussion threads not appearing in the repo itself and therefore not moving with them across repos). On that point I agree there is a reason to be concerned. So, I only consider use of those comments as a good alternative to use of an email thread (which is not connected to either/any repo). And, of course, at some point neither commit/pull-request comments nor email are a proper alternative to use of an issue tracker. I think it is worth noting that while the comment threads are not part of the git repo, the commits (and thus their comments) do have persistent URLs that can be useful in commit messages (especially CMR/pull-request merge commits), the issue tracker and even in devel-list emails. Those points might be worthy of mentioning in the git-usage docs for OMPI. -Paul -- Paul H. Hargrove phhargr...@lbl.gov Future Technologies Group Computer and Data Sciences Department Tel: +1-510-495-2352 Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory Fax: +1-510-486-6900
