[Insight-developers] My experience with gerrit

Wed Aug 25 13:28:09 EDT 2010

The commits *should* be reviewed independently of each other. If commits are
dependent on each other, that should be noted somehow. But if they're really
dependent on one another, perhaps they should be part of the same commit...

The reason to treat them independently is to allow for corrections and
modifications prior to merging to an official branch.

If you reviewed all of them at once, and had to reject because of one commit
in the middle that was disputed, then it would just take longer to get the
changes through, even though only the one commit had an issue.

David C.

On Wed, Aug 25, 2010 at 1:06 PM, Daniel Blezek <Blezek.Daniel at mayo.edu>wrote:

>  Hi Brad,
>
>   Another way to do this is to continue your micro commit workflow (which I
> really like), but cherry pick your commits into another branch that you send
> off to Gerrit.  Again, I don’t know *exactly* how to cherry pick, but I
> see the term used a lot with Gerrit/git.
>
>   I firmly believe that Gerrit will be an excellent way to work on ITK v4.
>  It will help us have a record of progress.  A little bit of rebasing pain
> is a small price to pay.
>
> Best,
> -dan
>
>
>
> On 8/25/10 11:59 AM, "Bradley Lowekamp" <blowekamp at mail.nih.gov> wrote:
>
> Dan,
>
> After I saw this behavior of Gerrit, I do recall some one saying that it is
> a commit level review tool.
>
> To squash multiple commits in a branch to a single one, the following could
> be done:
>
> git log master..jpeg2000io_review
>
> Which shows I have 5 commits in my branch, then perform interactive
> rebasing:
>
> git rebase -i jpeg2000io_review~5 jpeg2000io_review
>
> Then in the editor I would set all but the oldest commit to squash.
>
> But I don't think I want to do this, as I have been liking the branchy
> micro commit workflow (which I thought was the git way). So I may default to
> still sharing my code on github, for now.
>
> Brad
>
>
> On Aug 25, 2010, at 12:50 PM, Daniel Blezek wrote:
>
> Hi Brad,
>
>   My understanding from (briefly) reading the Gerrit docs is that this is
> the expected behavior.  Each change to Gerrit is expected to be separately
> reviewed.  If you want to avoid this, you can squash your changes with
> rebase (see this posting
> http://www.mailinglistarchive.com/html/repo-discuss@googlegroups.com/2009-04/msg00135.html).
>  Then you must only push the single commit containing the squashed series of
> commits.
>
> I’m not sure exactly how to rebase properly, nor how to push only one
> commit to Gerrit.  Perhaps Brad King or Marcus Hanwell can comment?
>
> Thanks,
> -dan
>
>
> On 8/25/10 11:29 AM, "Bradley Lowekamp" <blowekamp at mail.nih.gov <x-msg:
> //449/blowekamp at mail.nih.gov> > wrote:
>
> Hello all,
>
> I just tried to push to gerrit and it didn't go how I was hopping. I just
> finished rebasing my topic branch after the effects for uncrustification of
> ITK. I have the changes here on github:
>
> http://github.com/blowekamp/ITK/commits/jpeg2000io_review
>
> With GIT I have been using the philosophy of making more frequent and
> smaller commits. Make a change, build it test it, commit it. So for this
> topic, I have done 5 small commits, as show above.
>
> So with Gerrit, I did the following ( which seemed reasonable ):
>
> blowek1$ git push gerrit
> jpeg2000io_review:refs/for/master/jpeg2000io_review
>
> Counting objects: 31, done.
> Delta compression using up to 8 threads.
> Compressing objects: 100% (26/26), done.
> Writing objects: 100% (26/26), 4.14 KiB, done.
> Total 26 (delta 21), reused 0 (delta 0)
> remote: (W) 26c0e7: commit subject >65 characters; use shorter first
> paragraph
> remote: (W) 26c0e7: commit message lines >70 characters; manually wrap
> lines
> remote: (W) b788dc: commit subject >65 characters; use shorter first
> paragraph
> remote: (W) b788dc: commit message lines >70 characters; manually wrap
> lines
> remote: (W) 55057e: commit message lines >70 characters; manually wrap
> lines
> remote:
> remote: New Changes:
> remote:   http://review.source.kitware.com/3
> remote:   http://review.source.kitware.com/4
> remote:   http://review.source.kitware.com/5
> remote:   http://review.source.kitware.com/6
> remote:   http://review.source.kitware.com/7
> remote:
> To blowekamp at review.source.kitware.com:ITK <x-msg:
> //449/blowekamp at review.source.kitware.com:ITK>
>  * [new branch]      jpeg2000io_review -> refs/for/master/jpeg2000io_review
>
> First I am not sure what the issue is with the commit message. I write a
> short first line and then a long description ( no wrapping ), like I have
> been told is good practice with git.
>
> So the issues are:
> Each commit came up as a separate issue. I did not expect this. Perhaps my
> commit are too small, but this was not the result I expected.
> I am not sure the branch thing really works with gerrit. This topic is to
> be merged into master ( I will normally use the staging area to perform this
> ). I suppose gerrit is for the commit level review  and not the branch?
>
> It case someone doesn't have this handy:
>
> http://review.source.kitware.com/
>
> Brad
>
>
> ========================================================
>
> Bradley Lowekamp
>
> Lockheed Martin Contractor for
>
> Office of High Performance Computing and Communications
>
> National Library of Medicine
>
> blowekamp at mail.nih.gov <x-msg://449/blowekamp@mail.nih.gov>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
> _______________________________________________
> Powered by www.kitware.com <http://www.kitware.com>
>
> Visit other Kitware open-source projects at
> http://www.kitware.com/opensource/opensource.html
>
> Kitware offers ITK Training Courses, for more information visit:
> http://kitware.com/products/protraining.html
>
> Please keep messages on-topic and check the ITK FAQ at:
> http://www.itk.org/Wiki/ITK_FAQ
>
> Follow this link to subscribe/unsubscribe:
> http://www.itk.org/mailman/listinfo/insight-developers
>
>
> --
> *Daniel Blezek, PhD
> *Medical Imaging Informatics Innovation Center
>
> P 127 or (77) 8 8886
> T 507 538 8886
> E blezek.daniel at mayo.edu
>
> Mayo Clinic
> 200 First St. S.W.
> Harwick SL-44
> Rochester, MN 55905
> mayoclinic.org
> "It is more complicated than you think." -- RFC 1925
>
> _______________________________________________
> Powered by www.kitware.com
>
> Visit other Kitware open-source projects at
> http://www.kitware.com/opensource/opensource.html
>
> Kitware offers ITK Training Courses, for more information visit:
> http://kitware.com/products/protraining.html
>
> Please keep messages on-topic and check the ITK FAQ at:
> http://www.itk.org/Wiki/ITK_FAQ
>
> Follow this link to subscribe/unsubscribe:
> http://www.itk.org/mailman/listinfo/insight-developers
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.itk.org/mailman/private/insight-developers/attachments/20100825/e76f6dfe/attachment.htm>