5 ms·
Projects that use a rich code review tool like Gerrit, such as Android, OpenStack and wikipedia keep the truth in the code review tool.. but the actual git tree
by Daviey 11y ago
Projects that use a rich code review tool like Gerrit, such as Android, OpenStack and wikipedia keep the truth in the code review tool.. but the actual git tree is kept minimal and clean.
If you want to dig into the actual commit, and the dirty truth under the surface - use Gerrit.. you can even use git itself to pull down the truth.
I'm expecting this github feature to be the same, the pull request probably keeps the truth somehow.
- WorldMaker 11y agoI see this as a tooling problem. Why use two tools when you can use one? Why is "code review" not a first class citizen in your source control world? I don't have all the answers of what the tooling should be, I just think this is as a good an opportunity to discuss it as any. GitHub's long-standing --no-ff merges at least are one way of preserving the code review and it's internal changes directly into the git DAG. This mostly works except for tools like git bisect that treat the DAG as if it were a straight line, rather than making use of the fact that the system already supports complicated graphs. Furthermore, along the questions of why use two tools to navigate the code repository: I sort of wish that things like GitHub PR comments and code annotations made their way somehow into nodes in the git DAG.