| 1 |
On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 2:00 PM, Jeroen Roovers <jer@g.o> wrote: |
| 2 |
> Er, you can't be seriously suggesting we will drop repoman checks with |
| 3 |
> the migration to git? I don't see how that would benefit anyone. |
| 4 |
> |
| 5 |
|
| 6 |
Interesting point. One thing to keep in mind with git is that commits |
| 7 |
don't affect the "central repository." Pushes are what impacts the |
| 8 |
repository. |
| 9 |
|
| 10 |
If I spend six months working on a bunch of coordinated package |
| 11 |
changes, nobody will see a thing until I push those commits and 500 |
| 12 |
ebuilds all change atomically (not that I'm suggesting that lack of |
| 13 |
communication is to be encouraged). A repoman check on a commit may |
| 14 |
not reflect its impact six months later when it actually hits the main |
| 15 |
tree. |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
The right time to run repoman is probably right before doing a push, |
| 18 |
regardless of when any git commits were made. That isn't to say that |
| 19 |
it can't be run sooner. |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
So, splitting something up into multiple commits can be very |
| 22 |
lightweight, if repoman is only run before the push. This might |
| 23 |
create a need to be able to run repoman on more than one package |
| 24 |
directory, but on less than the entire tree (otherwise you'll end up |
| 25 |
having to do another pull/rebase before you push anyway). |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
Rich |
Archives