| 1 |
On Fri, Dec 6, 2019 at 5:51 AM Alexis Ballier <aballier@g.o> wrote: |
| 2 |
> |
| 3 |
> On Fri, 6 Dec 2019 04:33:36 -0500 |
| 4 |
> Tim Harder <radhermit@g.o> wrote: |
| 5 |
> |
| 6 |
> > On 2019-12-06 Fri 04:03, Alexis Ballier wrote: |
| 7 |
> > > it's not just like repoman and cvs since repoman commit did push ;) |
| 8 |
> > > it will never be perfect but i really like repoman commit to refuse |
| 9 |
> > > to even commit if there's something obviously wrong |
| 10 |
> > |
| 11 |
> > I'm more of the opinion (and am working towards that practicality in |
| 12 |
> > terms of runtime speed) that a subset of QA checks should be run as a |
| 13 |
> > git hook which would cause push failures on certain classes of bad |
| 14 |
> > commits. |
| 15 |
> |
| 16 |
> |
| 17 |
> There should be both. Amending the 23rd commit message because one |
| 18 |
> mistyped a semicolon is kind of a PITA. |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
It is? |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
git rebase -i HEAD~23 |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
Is that what you think is a pain in the ass, or do you not know about |
| 25 |
interactive rebase? :) |
Archives