On 08/05/2014 10:51 AM, ZZelle wrote: > Hi, > > > I like the idea ... with complex change, it could useful for the > understanding to split it into smaller changes during development.
I don't understand this. If it's a complex change that you need multiple commits to keep track of locally, why wouldn't reviewers want the same thing? Squashing a bunch of commits together solely so you have one review for Gerrit isn't a good thing. Is it just the warning message that git-review prints when you try to push multiple commits that is the problem here? > > > Do we need to expose such feature under git review? we could define a new > subcommand? git reviewflow? > > > Cédric, > ZZelle@IRC > > > > On Tue, Aug 5, 2014 at 4:49 PM, Ryan Brown <rybr...@redhat.com> wrote: > >> >> >> On 08/05/2014 09:27 AM, Sylvain Bauza wrote: >>> >>> Le 05/08/2014 13:06, Ryan Brown a écrit : >>> -1 to this as git-review default behaviour. Ideally, branches should be >>> identical in between Gerrit and local Git. >> >> Probably not as default behaviour (people who don't want that workflow >> would be driven mad!), but I think enough folks would want it that it >> should be available as an option. >> >>> I can understand some exceptions where developers want to work on >>> intermediate commits and squash them before updating Gerrit, but in that >>> case, I can't see why it needs to be kept locally. If a new patchset has >>> to be done on patch A, then the local branch can be rebased >>> interactively on last master, edit patch A by doing an intermediate >>> patch, then squash the change, and pick the later patches (B to E) >>> >>> That said, I can also understand that developers work their way, and so >>> could dislike squashing commits, hence my proposal to have a --no-squash >>> option when uploading, but use with caution (for a single branch, how >>> many dependencies are outdated in Gerrit because developers work on >>> separate branches for each single commit while they could work locally >>> on a single branch ? I can't iimagine how often errors could happen if >>> we don't force by default to squash commits before sending them to >> Gerrit) >>> >>> -Sylvain >>> >>>> Cheers, >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> OpenStack-dev mailing list >>> OpenStackfirstname.lastname@example.org >>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev >> >> I am well aware this may be straying into feature creep territory, and >> it wouldn't be terrible if this weren't implemented. >> >> -- >> Ryan Brown / Software Engineer, Openstack / Red Hat, Inc. >> >> _______________________________________________ >> OpenStack-dev mailing list >> OpenStackemail@example.com >> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev >> > > > > _______________________________________________ > OpenStack-dev mailing list > OpenStackfirstname.lastname@example.org > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev > _______________________________________________ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStackemail@example.com http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev