I do believe "(a)" looks to be the correct way to go. --Humble
--Humble On Sat, Nov 15, 2014 at 4:52 PM, Niels de Vos <[email protected]> wrote: > On Sat, Nov 15, 2014 at 11:46:46AM +0530, RAGHAVENDRA TALUR wrote: > > I could not reply to this thread yesterday. > > Earlier, test system used to take care of the rebase. > > However, it worked here only after I did a manual > > rebase on my machine and updated gerrit. > > Indeed, and I have noticed that too. I remember being able to just > resubmit the failed regression tests, and the change would be rebased on > top of HEAD of the branch. To me, that also looks a safer way of going > things, (relatively) old patches can be tested easier that way. > > I suspect that this change came with the triggered regression testing, > but I have not checked that. Do others have an opionion on with what > code the regression tests should be executed? Currently I am aware of > two possible ways: > > a. checkout the HEAD of the branch and cherry-pick the change on top > b. checkout the change (use the tree from the time the change was > posted) > > (b) seems to be the current way, my preference would go to (a). > > Please voice your opinions. Thanks, > Niels > _______________________________________________ > Gluster-devel mailing list > [email protected] > http://supercolony.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-devel >
_______________________________________________ Gluster-devel mailing list [email protected] http://supercolony.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-devel
