On 03/24/2014 11:08 AM, John Griffith wrote: > > On Mon, Mar 24, 2014 at 8:31 AM, John Dennis <jden...@redhat.com > <mailto:jden...@redhat.com>> wrote: > > When a change is complex good practice is to break the change into a > series of smaller individual patches that show the individual > incremental steps needed to get to the final goal. When partitioned into > small steps each change is easier to review and hopefully illustrates > the progression. > > Definitely agree, however I've noticed people aren't necessarily very > *good* about breaking these into logical pieces sometimes. In other > words it becomes random changes throughout multiple patches; in most > cases it seems to be after-thoughts or just what the submitter managed > to work on at the time. > > Personally I'd love to see these be a bit more well thought out and > organized for my own sake as a reviewer. While we're at it (I realize > this isn't the case you're talking about) I also would REALLY like to > not see 5 individual patches all dependent on each other and all just > changing one or two lines (I was seeing this quite a bit this cycle, and > the only thing I can think of is perhaps it's developers getting some > sort of points for number of commits). >
Some related good docs on splitting up changes: https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/GitCommitMessages -- Russell Bryant _______________________________________________ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev