| 1 |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- |
| 2 |
Hash: SHA1 |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
Donnie Berkholz wrote: |
| 5 |
> The patch in repoman just commits locally, it does not push. I suppose |
| 6 |
> an operation or option could be added that treats that as if it were a |
| 7 |
> single combined step, but I definitely do not want that as the only |
| 8 |
> choice. |
| 9 |
|
| 10 |
The main reason for wanting a push as well is to make the experience as |
| 11 |
close to previous repoman usage as possible. Changing from "repoman |
| 12 |
commit" to "repoman commit; git push" admittedly isn't much of a change, |
| 13 |
but it seems odd to expose the scm step to devs who previously could |
| 14 |
have got away with only using repoman. |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
I'm all for a option to allow for manual pushing. However, I'd also try |
| 17 |
to keep the normal repoman commands working as similarly to the current |
| 18 |
system as possible. Just from overlay usage I'm sure there'll be cases |
| 19 |
of fixes getting committed but not pushed. |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
What do people think? Since we're making the change, should we get devs |
| 22 |
into good habits with distributed SCM and know how it all works? Would |
| 23 |
it be better to push by default to maintain consistency with old versions? |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
Mike 5:) |
| 26 |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- |
| 27 |
Version: GnuPG v2.0.9 (GNU/Linux) |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
iEYEARECAAYFAkkgBBAACgkQu7rWomwgFXpXegCcCnH8cSvJLCU4lRfwYemmohSP |
| 30 |
PJoAn0+vwm9ukQskX+pm5qjw9xyc4rh9 |
| 31 |
=ZaRl |
| 32 |
-----END PGP SIGNATURE----- |
Archives