Bill Sommerfeld wrote:
On Mon, 2007-01-29 at 11:22 -0800, Stephen Lau wrote:
1) There will be no restriction on number of changesets fixed per
changegroup. You can address as many changesets in a putback as you like.
2) While there will be no restriction on number of bugs fixed per
changeset, it would behoove you (and whoever looks at the SCM history
after you) if bugs were separated out as much as possible. i.e.: if you
are fixing bugs which are completely independent and easily-separable,
please do so in separate changesets. If fixes for bugs are intertwined,
(i.e.: you are putting back a project which, in turn, fixes 9 other bugs
or something) then they may be combined into one changeset.
Will the tools permit manipulating a workspace such that specific deltas
can be moved between changesets? If not, I see myself defaulting to "N
bugs, one workspace, one changeset, one changegroup" since I often find
that dependencies between different fixes change over time as the fixes
under development evolve.
Which would be allowable.
Part of the problem here is that 'multiple deltas, as long as no bug is in
more than one of them' doesn't seem to be commonly known as acceptable (so
many things just say "one delta per-putback" when that isn't quite true).
We are, as I understand it, just stating more explicitly what's good and
what's bad, not changing either.
-- Rich
_______________________________________________
tools-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
