On 2014-12-30 10:32:22 -0600 (-0600), Dolph Mathews wrote:
> The default behavior, rebasing automatically, is the sane default
> to avoid having developers run into unexpected merge conflicts on
> new patch submissions.

Please show me an example of this in the wild. I suspect a lot of
reviewers are placing blame on this without due investigation.

> But if git-review can check to see if a review already exists in
> gerrit *before* doing the local rebase, I'd be in favor of it
> skipping the rebase by default if the review already exists.
> Require developers to rebase existing patches manually. (This is
> my way of saying I can't think of a good answer to your question.)

It already requires contributors to take manual action--it will not
automatically rebase and then push that without additional steps.

> While we're on the topic, it's also worth noting that --no-rebase
> becomes critically important when a patch in the review sequence
> has already been approved, because the entire series will be
> rebased, potentially pulling patches out of the gate, clearing the
> Workflow+1 bit, and resetting the gate (probably unnecessarily). A
> tweak to the default behavior would help avoid this scenario.

The only thing -R is going to accomplish is people uploading changes
which can never pass because they're merge-conflicting with the
target branch.
-- 
Jeremy Stanley

_______________________________________________
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

Reply via email to