On Thu, Nov 03, 2011 at 11:13:28AM +0000, Peekay Ex wrote: > Adam, > > On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 5:58 PM, <adam.spi...@gmail.com> wrote: > > I think I am now finished. The new patch series is available at > > > > https://github.com/aspiers/lilypond/commits/jazz > > > > IMHO there are now too many patches in the series to combine into a > > single commit for review. To do so would lose a lot of clarity in the > > git history. So I am not sure how this review process should proceed. > > One patch per tracker item?
I can do that if noone objects to tracker items for patches as trivial as converting tabs to whitespace? > > Anyhow, you can fetch the patches via: > > > > git remote add aspiers git://github.com/aspiers/lilypond.git > > git fetch aspiers jazz > > Sorry to belabor the point, but it is unlikely you are going to get > much review if those that understand this stuff (I don't, I just push > and pull and test formatted patches) have to get patches from a third > place. Hmm, well if everyone (including you) is already familiar with 'git pull' then doing 'git fetch' doesn't seem like a big stretch, but OK I'll assume that there are other good reasons for not operating like this. As long as you're OK with a tracker item for even tiny commits then I can work like that. > Even if it is just a Rietveld Issue then that is better than having to > git fetch from another repo, we in the Bug Squad can create the > trackers for you. If Rietveld doesn't support multiple patches per issue then that sounds like a fundamental flaw to me and perhaps it's time to reconsider moving to Gerrit. I'm guessing that combined with a CI tool such as Jenkins it might be able to solve some of the review / staging / release issues which have been mentioned on this list of the last few days - but I don't know anywhere near enough about LilyPond's development yet for that to be more than a guess. https://gerrit.chromium.org/gerrit/#q,status:open,n,z http://source.android.com/source/life-of-a-patch.html > > The patches also adjust the regression tests and English documentation > > to be consistent with changes to the code. Translation work is required > > for other languages. > > > > http://codereview.appspot.com/4981052/ > > So should we now be ignoring the stuff in this Rietveld issue? Yes, they're old now. In light of the above I guess it will have to be closed and superceded by new issues. _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
