[squeak-dev] The Inbox: Tools-fbs.301.mcz
leves at elte.hu
Sat Mar 5 10:47:44 UTC 2011
On Fri, 4 Mar 2011, Frank Shearar wrote:
> On 2011/03/03 23:20, commits at source.squeak.org wrote:
>> A new version of Tools was added to project The Inbox:
>> ==================== Summary ====================
>> Name: Tools-fbs.301
>> Author: fbs
>> Time: 3 March 2011, 11:20:00.889 pm
>> UUID: 9f787d80-6eb1-0741-a5ac-57d3a80a3c7a
>> Ancestors: Tools-fbs.300
>> * Complete removal of systemCategoryListIndex, replaced by
>> * selectedSystemCategoryListIndex/selectedSystemCategoryListIndex: remain,
>> used by Morphic, and defer to
>> * selectedSystemCategoryName defers to selectedSystemCategory, and all its
>> callers now call selectedSystemCategory.
>> * PackagePaneBrowser>>hasSystemCategorySelected pulled up to Browser.
>> =============== Diff against Tools-fbs.300 ===============
> Inbox etiquette question: I'm working on a fairly big chunk of code, ripping
> out Browser's indices. I could make 4 or 5 further commits of about the same
> complexity as this commit to finish off the change.
> I can see a couple of options:
> 1. Submit big chunks basing off Trunk, letting us lose the indices piecemeal.
> Basically, branch-per-feature, and each commit's a completed subfeature.
> 2. Submit one megachange, so that Tools-fbs.301 can be deleted.
> 3. Submit big chunks each based off the previous commit: a single branch with
> serial commits.
> 4. Other situations?
> I really don't like option 2: we're talking about rewriting large chunks of a
> critical piece of infrastructure.
> So what's the preferred way of submitting large features to the Inbox?
It's up to you. For the integrators 1 and 3 are the best. Reviewing small
changes is always easier.
More information about the Squeak-dev