On 01/19/2014 02:48 AM, Dan Kenigsberg wrote:
On Sat, Jan 18, 2014 at 01:48:52AM +0200, Itamar Heim wrote:
> I'd like to enable these - comments welcome:
>
> 1. label.Label-Name.copyAllScoresOnTrivialRebase
>
> If true, all scores for the label are copied forward when a new
> patch set is uploaded that is a trivial rebase. A new patch set is
> considered as trivial rebase if the commit message is the same as in
> the previous patch set and if it has the same code delta as the
> previous patch set. This is the case if the change was rebased onto
> a different parent. This can be used to enable sticky approvals,
> reducing turn-around for trivial rebases prior to submitting a
> change. Defaults to false.
>
>
> 2. label.Label-Name.copyAllScoresIfNoCodeChange
>
> If true, all scores for the label are copied forward when a new
> patch set is uploaded that has the same parent commit as the
> previous patch set and the same code delta as the previous patch
> set. This means only the commit message is different. This can be
> used to enable sticky approvals on labels that only depend on the
> code, reducing turn-around if only the commit message is changed
> prior to submitting a change. Defaults to false.
>
>
>
https://gerrit-review.googlesource.com/Documentation/config-labels.html
I think that the time saved by these copying is worth the dangers.
But is there a way to tell a human ack from an ack auto-copied by these
options? It's not so fair to blame X for "X approved this patch" when he
only approved a very similar version thereof.
we'll find out when we enable it.
Assuming that a clean rebase can do no wrong is sometimes wrong
(a recent example is detailed by Nir's
http://gerrit.ovirt.org/21649/ )
of course it can do wrong, but that's the exception usually.