----- Original Message -----
From: "Yedidyah Bar David" <didi@redhat.com> To: "Sven Kieske" <s.kieske@mittwald.de> Cc: devel@ovirt.org Sent: Wednesday, September 17, 2014 11:08:52 AM Subject: Re: [ovirt-devel] Stable branch gerrit hook and Related-To: bug
That is not a bad idea, but there is one use case you do not consider.. it would mean that feature cannot be merged before it is completed. I like my patches to be merged as soon as possible. Of course if the patches leave the tree in working state.
And I agree with him. There is no harm in merging to master branch changes that do not harm it, even make it better, just because they do not completely fix an existing bugzilla bug. Actually I think the opposite is true - a large bug that requires a large and complex change is usually better split to smaller changes that are easier to review/verify/etc.
+1 In some cases may be feasible -or actually better!- to pack the change in a single patch, but in general I believe it is better in every way if a change has its dependencies - maybe refactoring, maybe adding helper code and its tests split in different patches; this also makes review and backporting easier. Of course, the prerequisite is that the branch must be usable and stable after each change, but we always were in complete agreement about that. Bests, -- Francesco Romani RedHat Engineering Virtualization R & D Phone: 8261328 IRC: fromani