On Tue, May 28, 2013 at 5:25 PM, Richard Hipp <d...@sqlite.org> wrote:
> On Tue, May 28, 2013 at 11:05 AM, Laurens Van Houtven <_...@lvh.io> wrote: > >> >> My question about how this process with the "pending-review" branch works >> was more about the mechanics of how you'd use such a branch to facilitate >> code review. What goes in that branch? How does it get there? What is the >> sequence of fossil commands? >> > > You can create the branch as you do the comment. For example: > > fossil commit --branch pending-review > > Or > > fossil commit --branch experimental > Cool, thanks :) > If you forget to do it then, you can always visit a check-in after it is > committed and click on the "Edit" link to do things like revise the > check-in comment, update the check-in time, or move the check-in to a > different branch (such as "experimental" or "pending-review" or "mistake"). > Ah, I didn't know about that feature. > Sometimes somebody will check-in a change to trunk that I don't agree > with. When that happens, I just move their check-in off into a branch. > Right -- so basically, the default is to trust the commit is good and to do something when it goes wrong, as opposed to always reviewing all of the time? :) > A tangent: Note that when you "edit" a check-in, you are not really > changing the check-in. You are, instead, adding additional information. > Fossil does not erase or modify, it only augments. The original check-in > comment, and time, and branch are all still there for anybody to see. By > 'editing' the commit, you are adding a new record to the repository that > says "for display purposes, modify checking XYZ as follows..." > Right, that philosophy is one of the main reasons I want to get rid of git :) One thing I'm confused about though: "for display purposes"? I understand the ledger-like behavior of recording the change instead of changing the original, but I would expect that the checkin is for all intents and purposes in the new branch, not just for display ones. Notes also that Fossil allows you to start a new branch named (for example) > "experimental" even if there already exists one or more other branches with > the same name. At > http://www.fossil-scm.org/fossil/timeline?n=200&r=experimental it looks > like there are a dozen or more "experimental" branches currently in the > Fossil tree. > I knew that in the back of my head, but that definitely helped my understanding: I was still thinking in terms of one single review branch :-) Can commits be in multiple branches? > -- > D. Richard Hipp > d...@sqlite.org > > _______________________________________________ > fossil-users mailing list > fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org > http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users > >
_______________________________________________ fossil-users mailing list fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
