On Tue, Sep 13, 2016 at 7:29 PM, Nigel Babu <nigelb@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Fri, Sep 02, 2016 at 10:25:01AM +0530, Nigel Babu wrote:
> > > The reason cherry-pick was chosen was to keep the branch linear and
> > > avoid merge-commits as (I'm guessing here) this makes the tree hard to
> > > follow.
> > > Merge-if-necessary will not keep the branch linear. I'm not sure how
> > > rebase-if-necessary works though.
> > >
> > > Vijay, can you provide anymore background for the choice of
> > > cherry-pick and you opinion on the change?
> > >
> >
> > Unfortunately I do not recollect the reason for cherry-pick being the
> > current choice. FWIW, I think dependencies were being enforced a while
> > back in the previous version(s) of gerrit. Not sure if something has
> > changed in the more recent gerrit versions.
> >
>
> According to the documentation, the behavior was intended to be like how it is
> currently. If it worked in the past, it may have been a bug. Let me setup
> a test with Rebase-If-Necessary. Then we can make an informed decision on which
> way to go about it.
>
> --
> nigelb
I tested out Rebase-If-Necessary. This bit is very important:
When cherry picking a change, Gerrit automatically appends onto the end of the
commit message a short summary of the change's approvals, and a URL link back
to the change on the web. The committer header is also set to the submitter,
while the author header retains the original patch set author.
When using Rebase-If-Necessary, Gerrit does none of this. I'm guessing this is
a problem for us?
It is a problem, yes.
--
nigelb
_______________________________________________
Gluster-devel mailing list
Gluster-devel@xxxxxxxxxxx
http://www.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-devel
--
Pranith
_______________________________________________ Gluster-devel mailing list Gluster-devel@xxxxxxxxxxx http://www.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-devel
