Conflicts in BFAV posts

Marcus Denker denker at iam.unibe.ch
Tue Nov 16 11:45:31 UTC 2004


Am 15.11.2004 um 02:01 schrieb Thomas Koenig:

> Marcus, I see you've done a lot of reviews that resulted in conflicts.
> One of the more tedious parts of reviewing fixes is looking to see if
> they would regress some other change. Is there something special you 
> are
> doing to check for conflicts in the BFAV posts?
>

ConflictChecker. An I use an image with full updates info since 3.5, so
the checker can find conflicts even for changesets submitted last year.

>
> I could make this change to BFAV if we really want it. However, it
> strikes me that "conflict" is orthoganal to the harvest status 
> dimension
> that the tabs represent.  We've already added 'bugs' as another
> non-orthogonal aspect to the tabs.  Do we really want to continue that
> way?  The answer may very well be yes because bugs and posts with
> conflicts merit special attention. If so, would the order be bug,
> conficts, reviewed,approved, update, closed, all?  With a post being
> made a conflict unless it's in the approved, update, closed status?
>
>

The problem is that all those changesets that need work are distracting
from those that can just be added. I won't fix those conflicts, so for 
me,
everything is done. The review is finished, the change can't be added 
like
that.

     Marcus




More information about the Squeak-dev mailing list