On Thu, Jan 2, 2014 at 10:18 PM, Volker Braun <[email protected]> wrote: > On Thursday, January 2, 2014 6:08:59 PM UTC-10, Nils Bruin wrote: >> >> In which case we'd want a lot more history discarding/rewriting to happen >> before a commit gets positive review. Wouldn't we be back at the hg workflow >> with patches, with patches replaced by git commits? > > > No, the key is to send commit ranges for review. In other words, you squash > the history for review *only*, but then go back and use the git merge for > the original history. > > One example of a review tool is Phabricator (from Facebook), there are > others. Downside is that it is yet another complicated machine, with its own > command line utilities.
The advantage of specifying the review process in terms of git (e.g. commits) is that people can use whatever tools they want. - Robert -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sage-devel" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
