[squeak-dev] The Inbox: Tools-fbs.301.mcz

Frank Shearar frank.shearar at angband.za.org
Sat Mar 5 13:24:12 UTC 2011

On 2011/03/05 10:47, Levente Uzonyi wrote:
> 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:
>>> http://source.squeak.org/inbox/Tools-fbs.301.mcz
>>> ==================== 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
>>> selectedSystemCategory.
>>> * selectedSystemCategoryListIndex/selectedSystemCategoryListIndex:
>>> remain, used by Morphic, and defer to
>>> selectedSystemCategory/selectedSystemCategory:.
>>> * 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.

3's mildly easier for me. I just wasn't sure about how people would feel 
with me dumping a whole string of commits in the Inbox. On one hand it 
seems a bit messy because the actual thing I want to go into Trunk will 
be the when-I'm-done commit, but on the other hand putting the versions 
in the Inbox means that integrators can more easily see what's going on.


More information about the Squeak-dev mailing list