gerrit [was: minutes of ESC call ...]
sbergman at redhat.com
Fri Jul 13 00:29:56 PDT 2012
On 07/13/2012 12:21 AM, Lionel Elie Mamane wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 12, 2012 at 04:55:50PM +0100, Michael Meeks wrote:
>> + lots of supposed / bogus patch inter-dependency
>> + multiple commits when pushed are marked dependent,
>> even if they are not etc.
> I kinda understand where that's coming from, but frankly I find that
> too strict / restrictive from gerrit's part; if the patches commute
> purely on basis of "do not touch the same lines" (one applies cleanly
> without the other), then just make them "independent". Yes, might miss
> "semantic dependencies" like "added a function in a .hxx" in one
> commit and "use that function" in another commit. But in case of
> doubt, err on the side of *not* annoying the user.
Machine cannot determine dependency among patches, and I see no reason
here to try to do so nevertheless, with whatever heuristic. Rather, I
prefer if the user has to mark patches as dependent or not. If the
current interface makes it too easy for users to erroneously mark
patches as dependent, then we should consider redesigning the interface.
More information about the LibreOffice