On Sun, Feb 3, 2013 at 12:24 PM, Jed Brown <jedbrown at mcs.anl.gov> wrote:
> > On Sun, Feb 3, 2013 at 11:17 AM, Matthew Knepley <knepley at gmail.com>wrote: > >> Its more work for me. Clearly you are asking me to do something I do not >> currently do. A loss. >> > > How is _not typing 'hg merge' or 'hg pull'_ harder than typing it? Do your > work in a bookmark and merge it when it's ready for review. It's not a hard > concept. > It is clearly more work. > >> >>> There are no "gains" from a baseline. This is >>>> a point I have made multiple times. Changes must be justified. >>>> >>> >>> I provided a long list of justifications that you have not responded to. >>> There is a great deal of empirical evidence to back my claims. >>> >> >> I have responded to each and every point carefully. You need to listen. > > > You have not said anything about reviewability, actual bug rates, > extensibility, ability to recognize distinct features in the history, or > realized and perceived stability and lack of spurious warnings when users > pull petsc-dev. > Reviewability: I have responded that a) you are reviewing at the wrong time, and b) your second example was a perfectly reviewable checkin which resulted in an easy fix. Actual bug rates: you have not offered any evidence here, so my assertion is that they do not decrease Extensibility: Your assertion is that extensibility benefits from code review. I agree. You are reviewing at the wrong time. Code reviews should be organized, not carried out after every checkin. Ability to recognize distinct features in history: I do not think this is worth preserving at the cost of a lot more process. This is the linux model where everything is smoothed out into a series of clean patches. We have explicitly chosen not to do this. It obscures the actual development process and I am not convinced it is as useful here as they claim in the kernel. Warnings: I did respond to that, so its not worth repeating here. Matt -- What most experimenters take for granted before they begin their experiments is infinitely more interesting than any results to which their experiments lead. -- Norbert Wiener -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.mcs.anl.gov/pipermail/petsc-dev/attachments/20130203/26303f0a/attachment.html>
