Hi ----- Original Message ----- > > > On 26 Jul 2017, at 11:23, Marc-André Lureau <marcandre.lureau@xxxxxxxxxx> > > wrote: > > > > Hi > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > >> Now, any objection to > >> > >> 1. Recommending that we use git URLs in patches? > > > > If that may help, but as Christophe said, this may be overkill for small > > series. Let's not make it a rule. > > > >> 2. Having a shared location for branches under review? > > > > This is really contrary to the distributed nature of git. > > If that was true, why would the inventor of git, Linus Torvalds, use a public > shared place like kernel.org? > > Git gives you the freedom to have multiple repos and sync them easily. It > does not place a restriction that you can’t have a shared one for a team. > > > > > Add a remote remote repo if you are interested by tracking someone else > > work, it works just as well. > > No, it does not. It means you need to git fetch multiple places. It’s > complicated enough that there are 17 repositories in the spice project. For > one of them I have 12 remotes already. That does not scale well. > git remote add/update, it scales fine.. > > > > Imho, we could benefit using a system tracking patch series state from the > > mailing list, such as patchew. But it would probably need some work to fit > > Spice needs. > > We would benefit from that, yes. But that’s another issue entirely. If the issue is about tracking patch series state, then it's not not entirely different. Thanks _______________________________________________ Spice-devel mailing list Spice-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/spice-devel