IssueRaiser

It's essentially rewriting history.

It's essentially rewriting history. As a contributor it's nice to know a commit went in exactly as you wrote it, which is not the case when the commit hash changes. Git is powerful because it was written with the ability to merge trees. The cherry pick workflow is throwing all of that in the trash. Why not use SVN at that point? Because of cherry picking in Gerrit, dependent patches are a nightmare to maintain. Say patch c depends on b, which depends on a. Now say that patch c requires a change that merged into master. Because you can't merge into your development branch, you have to rebase c AND b AND a. This really pissed of the owners of b and a because it shows up as a new changset and wipes out votes. God forbid you depend on two different patches that each have separate dependencies. You can use the merge commit to add the review information if you want. Then you don't have to molest the code change commit.

Posted by hueving on Feb 14, 2015, 11:49 PM

Tags

Related issues

Raise real-world problems, find people facing the same issue, and discuss solutions.8,000 issues0 comments

hackernews (Other)

It's essentially rewriting history.

huevingFeb 14, 2015, 11:49 PM

It's essentially rewriting history. As a contributor it's nice to know a commit went in exactly as you wrote it, which is not the case when the commit hash changes. Git is powerful because it was written with the ability to merge trees. The cherry pick workflow is throwing all of that in the trash. Why not use SVN at that point? Because of cherry picking in Gerrit, dependent patches are a nightmare to maintain. Say patch c depends on b, which depends on a. Now say that patch c requires a change that merged into master. Because you can't merge into your development branch, you have to rebase c AND b AND a. This really pissed of the owners of b and a because it shows up as a new changset and wipes out votes. God forbid you depend on two different patches that each have separate dependencies. You can use the merge commit to add the review information if you want. Then you don't have to molest the code change commit.

Comments (0)

No comments yet. Start the discussion.

Comment on this issue