| 1 |
On 05/15/2016 03:55 PM, Duncan wrote: |
| 2 |
> Daniel Campbell posted on Sun, 15 May 2016 04:04:57 -0700 as excerpted: |
| 3 |
> |
| 4 |
>> If the dev in question hasn't done that before, then it's entirely |
| 5 |
>> possible they *thought* they tested, or tested it *before* making some |
| 6 |
>> other edit and absent-mindedly committed. |
| 7 |
> |
| 8 |
> Again, legacy CVS thought pattern. In git, commit != push, and it's the |
| 9 |
> push that's critical. |
| 10 |
> |
| 11 |
> Commit all you want without testing. Just test (and fix if necessary) |
| 12 |
> before you push those commits up to the gentoo master repo. =:^) |
| 13 |
> |
| 14 |
> (Of course, rebasing to fold the broken commit and its fix into one |
| 15 |
> before pushing doesn't hurt, either.) |
| 16 |
> |
| 17 |
Sorry. I've actually been using git for years, but since I got started |
| 18 |
with Gentoo on CVS and I try to be careful with my commits to the gentoo |
| 19 |
repo, I conflated them. You're right, the push is what matters the most. |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
-- |
| 22 |
Daniel Campbell - Gentoo Developer |
| 23 |
OpenPGP Key: 0x1EA055D6 @ hkp://keys.gnupg.net |
| 24 |
fpr: AE03 9064 AE00 053C 270C 1DE4 6F7A 9091 1EA0 55D6 |
Archives