Hellooooooooooo !! > Btw, I'm still not convinced by Volker's explanations,
Well, by the look of that thread I don't think anybody but Volker was actually convinced :-P > and the policy I > was suggesting at the beginning of that thread still makes more sense to > me. In summary, here's what I was suggesting: > > 1. The default diff/commits view of a ticket T linked from its trac page > should be something like > > git log --graph commit ^trac/develop ^dep1 ^dep2 ... Yes. A big "YES" > where commit is the contents of T's Commit field and dep1, dep2... > are the contents of the Commit fields of the tickets D1, D2... listed > in T's Dependencies field. > > Setting T to positive_review means that the set of commits described > by the above "git log" command has been reviewed. Indeed. Actually, now that I understand GIt better, it really feels like we should not be reviewing branches but rewieving *COMMITS*. This way we would know which commits we can use. Reviewing branches does not seem to make any sense in a git workflow. I mean, it's the source of all problems we have right now. > If anyone can explain why "Volker's model" is safer than that, I'm very > interested. And if somebody agrees that this is not a good model, I would be interested too. Nathann -- 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.
