On Mar 20, 2009, at 9:36 AM, James Turnbull wrote:
> Luke Kanies wrote:
>> On Mar 20, 2009, at 5:17 AM, Paul Nasrat wrote:
>>
>>> 2009/3/20 Luke Kanies <[email protected]>:
>>>> Things are actually in a broken state here because we've
>>>> got a conflict between how the two sides do their work
>>>> and some extraction needs to get done. This commit
>>>> is just a stopping-point so I can do the necessary
>>>> refactoring.
>>> Whilst it's good to capture history it might make code review easier
>>> if things like this get folded/collapsed into the fixing commit.
>>
>> Yeah, this was a mistake - I was pretty sure I'd had a commit like
>> this,
>> but I looked through the commit titles in rebase -i and couldn't spot
>> it,
>> so I assumed I was wrong. I obviously should have looked more
>> deeply.
>>
>> It's apparently already been merged, so now it's too late to fix.
>>
>
> Did you not want it merged? One shouldn't mark it "Ready for Checkin"
> then. :)
We almost need a 'ready for review' phase - everyone's patches have to
go through my review before merging, but there's no such clear line
for my own code (one assumes I've reviewed it, right?).
I guess I'd just say it's safe to give people a day or two to review
my code before merging, in most cases, but it's often safe to just
merge, too.
--
America believes in education: the average professor earns more money
in a year than a professional athlete earns in a whole week.
-- Evan Esar
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Luke Kanies | http://reductivelabs.com | http://madstop.com
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Puppet Developers" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected]
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-dev?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
