On Thu, Jan 5, 2012 at 10:58 AM, Sylvain Lebresne <sylv...@datastax.com> wrote: > Again, I was more talking about the only reasonable solution I saw. > Because to be clear, if the history for some issue 666 in say trunk looks > like: > > commit eeee: last nits from reviewer > commit dddd: oops, typo that prevented commit > commit cccc: some more fix found during review > commit bbbb: refactor half of preceding patch following reviewer comments > commit aaaa: Do something awesome - patch for #666
Don't forget commit ffff: <merge> (i.e., resolve conflicts introduced in master post-branch) > So basically my question is how do we meld all those commits that will > necessarily happen due to the nature of distributed reviews so that our > main history don't look like shit? And if the answer is "we don't" then > I'm not too fond of that solution. +1 -- Jonathan Ellis Project Chair, Apache Cassandra co-founder of DataStax, the source for professional Cassandra support http://www.datastax.com
