On March 30 2012 at 21:25, Platonides wrote:
<snip>
> How would you script that if you don't have the files? (as they are
> pending a merge)
> Could we have a branch which included all non-abandoned patches? Or
> maybe all patches whose total feedback is not negative.

One just have to fetch the non-merged change from Gerrit. Git magic is:

 # Fetch change 1234
 $ git fetch gerrit refs/changes/34/1234

 # Switch to that branch:
 $ git checkout FETCH_HEAD

Remember that "refs/changes/34/1234" is just a pointer to some commit
object exactly like "master". So you can switch to it, run your tests
and submit their results.

<snip>
>> We should have less fixme nowadays since we have adopted a pre merge
>> review, <snip>
>
> Can someone measure at CodeReview the number of revisions which went to
> fixme after having been on ok? gerrit system allowing pre-review doesn't
> help with the 'false review rate'.
> There *will* be bugs which get merged into the main repo. Not every
> master status will be perfectly stable, as we wish it were.
> Ability to mark the patchsets as fixme is a good tool. If we had a list
> of follow-ups in gerrit, that would also be useful.

We already have the fixme feature. That is done by down voting a
patchset in the codereview field (the infamous : "I would prefer that
you didn't submit this").

The follow up we have been abusing is also build in since you usually
just send a second patch.  A follow up to a previous merge is either a
new feature or a bug fix, it can still reference the change number but I
am not sure there is any value in doing so.

Whenever someone would need to use followup, he should probably use a
branch instead. Branch are cheap, use them :-]


-- 
Antoine "hashar" Musso


_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l

Reply via email to