Current-Users archive

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Old Index]

Re: ongoing git vs hg (was: 5 days old?)

At Wed, 13 May 2020 21:30:29 +0200, Joerg Sonnenberger <> wrote:
Subject: Re: ongoing git vs hg (was: 5 days old?)
> On Wed, May 13, 2020 at 12:21:50PM -0700, Greg A. Woods wrote:
> > At Wed, 13 May 2020 14:14:16 +0200, Joerg Sonnenberger <> wrote:
> >
> > > I have no idea what the OP is talking about. Mercurial doesn't have pull
> > > requests, neither does git BTW. So this is about some specific web UI or
> > > review tool, but I don't even know which one.
> >
> > Consider "pull request" to stand in for _any_ kind of workflow and
> > mechanism that third parties would use to submit changes along with the
> > recorded existing metadata for those changes, to the upstream project's
> > repository.
> The statement still makes no sense at all. Nothing forces you to fold
> all incremental steps into a single changeset.

Some workflows clearly do force squashing of commits into a single one
(even in git-only projects or hg-only projects), else Kun wouldn't have
written what he did, and I wouldn't be wondering as well.

So thus the question remains:  What will NetBSD's workflow be?  Will it
be compatible with merging a set of changes from a third party in much
the manner of what's typically called a "pull request" in the Git
(github, gitlab, etc., etc., etc.) world, and especially in a way that
avoids squashing a branch into a single commit (thus losing commit

					Greg A. Woods <>

Kelowna, BC     +1 250 762-7675           RoboHack <>
Planix, Inc. <>     Avoncote Farms <>

Attachment: pgp_bBPVXv8_3.pgp
Description: OpenPGP Digital Signature

Home | Main Index | Thread Index | Old Index