Sorry, didn't mean "workflow", mean "repo". On Thu, Oct 19, 2017 at 11:54 AM, Jim Apple <jbap...@cloudera.com> wrote:
> In between when I saw the edit and when I saw this email, I re-edited. > Please fell free to re-edit again. Mostly I didn't want "Publish" to sound > like it was going to be part of the workflow, but I also made drafts the > second suggestion, because I would expect gerrit newbies to publish there > too often and then disappear when nobody reviews their code. > > New users misunderstanding and abusing refs/for/master is rare. > > On Thu, Oct 19, 2017 at 11:44 AM, Philip Zeyliger <phi...@cloudera.com> > wrote: > >> On Thu, Oct 19, 2017 at 10:50 AM, Daniel Hecht <dhe...@cloudera.com> >> wrote: >> >> > Add this info to >> > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IMPALA/ >> > Using+Gerrit+to+submit+and+review+patches >> > if not already there? >> >> >> Thanks for the suggestion. >> >> I updated >> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IMPALA/Using+ >> Gerrit+to+submit+and+review+patches#UsingGerrittosubmitandreviewpatches- >> Sendingapatchforreview.1 >> to basically recommend the draft workflow over the "refs/for" workflow. I >> think it's a good idea for new contributors to review their code reviews >> first and explicitly hit publish. Experienced contributors will get >> sufficiently acquainted with Gerrit over time. >> >> -- Philip >> > >
