From: Mike Hearn <mike@plan99•net>
To: Andy Parkins <andyparkins@gmail•com>
Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-development@lists•sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Code review
Date: Fri, 4 Oct 2013 13:32:47 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CANEZrP1-4vP10w6_Yg3tXAKcMh406rw2bsAnvML2WoaU5SUjYw@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <3552695.aET6a1zFq8@momentum>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1041 bytes --]
> There is more to a git branch than just the overall difference. Every
> single
> log message and diff is individually valuable.
When the log messages don't accurately describe the contents of the diff,
it's just misinformation and noise. Everyone starts out by wanting a neat
collection of easy to understand and review commits, but in practice it's
extremely hard to always get it.
I know how to make squashed commits, thanks. I've done LOTS of code review
in my life. I'm making a point here as one of the few people who goes
through large pull requests and reviews them line by line. It's hard,
partly because github sucks, and partly because reviewing lots of small
commits sucks.
There's nothing that makes a single large commit harder to review. It's the
same amount of code or strictly less, given the tendency for later commits
to change earlier ones. You can easily search the entire change whilst
reviewing. There are lots of things that make it easier.
FWIW inside Google the code review process is one-commit-one-review.
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1453 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-10-04 11:32 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-10-04 10:30 Mike Hearn
2013-10-04 10:42 ` Andy Parkins
2013-10-04 11:32 ` Mike Hearn [this message]
2013-10-04 12:34 ` Andy Parkins
2013-10-04 11:35 ` Peter Todd
2013-10-04 11:58 ` Arto Bendiken
2013-10-04 12:14 ` Peter Todd
2013-10-04 12:34 ` Andy Parkins
2013-10-04 11:53 ` Peter Todd
2013-10-04 12:14 ` Mike Hearn
2013-10-04 12:22 ` Eugen Leitl
2013-10-05 2:31 ` Gavin Andresen
2013-10-05 4:02 ` Warren Togami Jr.
2013-10-05 11:36 ` Mike Hearn
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=CANEZrP1-4vP10w6_Yg3tXAKcMh406rw2bsAnvML2WoaU5SUjYw@mail.gmail.com \
--to=mike@plan99$(echo .)net \
--cc=andyparkins@gmail$(echo .)com \
--cc=bitcoin-development@lists$(echo .)sourceforge.net \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox