On 2020/01/24 13:57:33, Dan Eble wrote: > On 2020/01/24 13:45:50, dak wrote: > > Hoo yes. That kind of extensive change is going to hurt anyway given the > > current burst activity level. It will likely suck either way. Do you have > > particular dependencies yourself, Dan? > > I have a bunch of private branches (contexts, rehearsal marks, warning clean-up) > that I would like to get on with rebasing. Normally, once I'm pretty sure that > a change of mine will be pushed, I'll just rebase to it locally, but with this > one, I don't want to start until it's in master. > > If you want help handling Han-Wen's patches tomorrow, you can delegate some to > me.
Well, I should be able to handle them well enough. It would be preferable if Han-Wen would provide Git-formatted patches (Rietveld is missing out on commit messages unless you consider scooping them up from the description as such, and while I would make sure that issue numbers are in the title lines, I think future rebases/merges at least for Han-Wen himself would work better if I work from original commits rather than original diffs). And then it makes little sense distributing those patches to more than one person. https://codereview.appspot.com/579240043/
