@madams This branch is totally unreviewable in its current form, and it cannot be bisected because many of the intermediate states are broken. I understand making haphazard/checkpoint commits while developing, but to maintain reviewability and quality in the long term, it's important to organize the commits so that they can be understood in sequence. Commit messages like "...", "temp version", and "cleaning up" force the reviewer to read the commit in its entirety to have any idea what it is supposed to accomplish. This makes it difficult to keep track of what is happening, which discourages people from following development, avoiding duplicate/conflicting work, etc.
We have to support everything that goes into PETSc, but if we can't follow development, we give outdated advice and end up unable to answer questions. Most people working on PETSc are organizing their commits to be reviewable these days. We can go to the commit and branch lists (in the web interface or with Git locally) and the first line of the commit message gives a good summary of what the commit is accomplishing, the body of the commit message explains why it is important/who may be impacted by the change, and the commit itself accomplishes something that the viewer can check. This allows other developers to quickly get the gist of what is in a branch, what may be interesting to look at in more detail, etc. Commit topology and messages are key means by which developers communicate with each other. It really doesn't take much effort once you get in the habit of organizing commits as a means of communication rather than as a log with arbitrary checkpoints. Any other means of communication, such as pull request summaries or mailing list threads, are secondary sources, inherently more error-prone and higher effort to evaluate, and provide less structure for automated diagnostics/summaries. https://bitbucket.org/petsc/petsc/wiki/writing-commit-messages Git provides good tools for reordering/squashing/amending commits, so it's possible to develop in clutter and then organize when it's time to communicate to other people. This PR is blocked on some of Matt's long-running branches. @knepley When will 'knepley/feature-dmda-section' and 'knepley/feature-plex-refine-3d' be ready to merge? Mark Adams <[email protected]> writes: > --- you can reply above this line --- > > A new pull request has been opened by Mark Adams. > > madams/sr-driver2 has changes to be pulled into master. > > https://bitbucket.org/petsc/petsc/pull-request/109/added-at-test-simplified-version-of-ex11 > > Title: Added at test, simplified version of ex11, convergence test. Uses > differencing to produce matrix in stand alone code, fixed SNES to support > this. > > Changes to be pulled: > > c1fa6a8934f2 by Mark Adams: "cleanup jed's cherry picked version" > e7b0c4510d02 by Jed Brown: "Merge branch 'knepley/fix-plex-ghost-cells' into > jed/sr-driver > > DMLabelFilter is…" > c56f055af68b by Mark Adams: "finished up adding serial DMPlex test with a > convergance test on a 5-point Lapla…" > 8fdc87fb42d2 by Mark Adams: "cleaning up" > 0fb202fbc65d by Mark Adams: "cleaning up > > Conflicts: > src/ts/examples/tutorials/makefile" > ... and 112 more. > > > -- > > Unsubscribe from pull request emails for this repository. > https://bitbucket.org/petsc/petsc/pull-request/109/unsubscribe/jedbrown/bc8a9c9283892888c102096c5dadc4a6a692a4fe/
pgpwQ8DBQxWfg.pgp
Description: PGP signature
