[Lazarus] Groundwork for Undo in Form Designer

Alexander Klenin klenin at gmail.com
Sat Jan 16 18:03:34 CET 2010

On Sun, Jan 17, 2010 at 01:52, Juha Manninen <juha.manninen at phnet.fi> wrote:
>> If you have, say, 10 patches and each requires a week to get approved
>> and committed, then you will spend 70 days on the whole feature.
>> Instead, you can create a patch series in maybe a week or two, and then
>> it may require a couple of weeks for review as a whole.
>> Thus, total development time may be cut in half or more.
> Sorry, I still don't get your idea.
> The benefit of many intermediate commits is to allow other developers to test
> my changes and give feedback, and also to prevent changes from deviating too
> much from the main code-base thus making merging harder later.
> I thought it is a central idea of such community driven projects.

As you have already experienced, waiting for review of every commit is
very inefficient.
This is even move true in an open-source project, where reviewers are
volunteers who might, for example, have only one day per week available for the
open-source project. So even if it only takes 10 minutes to review your patch,
you might still have to wait a week for it.
Obviously, batching patches makes sense in such an environment.

> I don't see any benefit of creating 10 intermediate patches for some mirror
> server if nobody tests them.
> If the results are finally reviewed as a whole, then I could as well make one
> big patch in the end. I don't want to do that.

One big patch is hard or impossible to review.
Look how it is done on LKML or git mailing list

> I believe Git has good tools for branches but it doesn't help if nobody
> "pulls" from my Git branch.

No, you can export patches from git in a traditional format,
so pulling from you is not necessary.

Alexander S. Klenin

More information about the Lazarus mailing list