<div dir="ltr"><br><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Tue, Sep 6, 2016 at 4:35 PM, Marc Dequènes (Duck) <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:duck@redhat.com" target="_blank">duck@redhat.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><span class=""><br>
On 09/06/2016 10:10 PM, Barak Korren wrote:<br>
<br>
> I find that typically work history can be lease then ideal for<br>
> presenting work to other developers. For me I typically find that I<br>
> can narrow down commits by a factor of 3-5 when going from actual work<br>
> history to a commit series that describes gradual accumulation of<br>
> major features.<br>
<br>
</span>In ideal way I would have done topic branches from the start. Already<br>
moving out the Vagrant work was a pain in the ass, so it would mean<br>
hours or rebasing to aggregate fixes, which I'm clearly not willing to do.<br>
<br>
So I agree on presenting the history, except in this case (without<br>
gerrit) all the discussions about why something was setup one way and<br>
then changed is not in reviews and associated comments. So if I squash<br>
commits, messages explaining the reasons are lost.<br>
<span class=""><br>
> Please not that I did not mean that you should squash all commits to a<br>
> single big one, just narrow them down and reorder to make it easier<br>
> for us to understand your major themes and ideas.<br>
<br>
</span>That would probably be nice, but I'm not gonna redo all my work again,<br>
with things months behind I do not recall perfectly.<br>
<br>
So unless a decent proposition is done, well, we're stuck.<br>
<br>
With the current limitations of Gerrit (acknowledging your other reply)<br>
I see only two possibilities, none of them satisfying:<br>
- reviewing (well, accepting in fact) all the commits one by one. this<br>
is boring but history is preserved<br>
- cleaning all reviews I sent by mistake, and have just 2 commits:<br>
base layout with MM3 full, and Vagrant work<br>
<br>
I would have preferred my work being used as it is as the base<br>
repository of gerrit, or even better that this gerrit repository was<br>
created from the start (but with noone to really be able to review<br>
except myself). Now this is the hard way.<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div>I'm fine with this as long as the commit msg will include link to GitHub with the history.</div><div>So you can push the code as new branch or a single squash commit to Gerrit.</div><div> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<br>
<br>______________________________<wbr>_________________<br>
Infra mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Infra@ovirt.org">Infra@ovirt.org</a><br>
<a href="http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/infra" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://lists.ovirt.org/<wbr>mailman/listinfo/infra</a><br>
<br></blockquote></div><br><br clear="all"><div><br></div>-- <br><div class="gmail_signature" data-smartmail="gmail_signature"><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div>Eyal Edri<br>Associate Manager</div><div>RHV DevOps<br>EMEA ENG Virtualization R&D<br>Red Hat Israel<br><br>phone: +972-9-7692018<br>irc: eedri (on #tlv #rhev-dev #rhev-integ)</div></div></div></div></div></div></div>
</div></div>