>
> Today, it looks like the majority of development is done directly in the 
>> default repo. A minor modification in the workflow would I think produce 
>> the result we are looking for without all the overhead of switching hosting 
>> and all the associated loss of history that would occur. If *all* 
>> developers were working from personal clones (and you really need only one 
>> because you can branch inside it and keep your clone trunk in sync with the 
>> default repo trunk) that had code review enabled, it would allow for all 
>> changes to be reviewed right in Google Code *before* being pushed to the 
>> default repo. There isn't any bandwidth hit because you don't need local 
>> copies of all the clones. Instead, those with default repo commit access 
>> simply point to whichever clone *on the server* that you need to pull from 
>> when you need to update the default repo.
>>
>
> A less radical modification to the current workflow would be to use named 
> feature branches within the default repo for any major development that 
> might require review. Then those with commit access could work the change 
> together on the branch in the default repo and request code review before 
> merging back to the default branch. Anyone without commit access can still 
> pursue the personal clone approach then request review and pull by creating 
> an Issue in the tracker. That lowers the admin overhead for the main 
> contributors while providing a good, clean way for new contributors to 
> provide code in a reviewable way.
>

After stewing on this some more, this latter branching approach might be 
preferable since it would tie the majority of the code reviews to commits 
in the *default project repository* as opposed to placing it in the 
personal clones, which can be deleted by the individual user at any time. 
Perhaps reviews in the clones would be a way to get a preliminary 
acceptance. If accepted, the changes could be pulled to a branch in the 
default repo where the complete review and refinement would take place, 
tied to the central project repository, prior to merge.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"spyder" group.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/spyderlib/-/wowOMAPVADkJ.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected].
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/spyderlib?hl=en.

Reply via email to