From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gentoo-dev+bounces-91669-garchives=archives.gentoo.org@lists.gentoo.org>
Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80])
	(using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits))
	(No client certificate requested)
	by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AD7C81382C5
	for <garchives@archives.gentoo.org>; Wed, 27 May 2020 13:23:00 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id A4C2EE08AE;
	Wed, 27 May 2020 13:22:56 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (dev.gentoo.org [IPv6:2001:470:ea4a:1:5054:ff:fec7:86e4])
	(using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits))
	(No client certificate requested)
	by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 679A2E0870
	for <gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>; Wed, 27 May 2020 13:22:56 +0000 (UTC)
Date: Wed, 27 May 2020 15:22:50 +0200
From: Guilherme Amadio <amadio@gentoo.org>
To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Value of Continuous integration vs Code Review /
 Pull Requests
Message-ID: <20200527132250.GA1405744@gentoo.org>
References: <CAAr7Pr-AU42K2k5vP34cXRtEpp-ED1vKyCBoCRXDZ7oNvQBLdQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <000501d63420$b43d6a90$1cb83fb0$@gentoo.org>
 <9de5a6f6-340d-e039-4bb9-0c47a0480355@gentoo.org>
Precedence: bulk
List-Post: <mailto:gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gentoo-dev+help@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:gentoo-dev+unsubscribe@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gentoo-dev+subscribe@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail <gentoo-dev.gentoo.org>
X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
X-Auto-Response-Suppress: DR, RN, NRN, OOF, AutoReply
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
In-Reply-To: <9de5a6f6-340d-e039-4bb9-0c47a0480355@gentoo.org>
X-Archives-Salt: 1d78eacd-3123-46bc-9e32-90d80edd9052
X-Archives-Hash: fe5e3e12393c61892d2d238b1794b3f2

Hi,

On Wed, May 27, 2020 at 02:45:29PM +0200, Toralf Förster wrote:
> On 5/27/20 2:16 PM, Thomas Deutschmann wrote:
> > The problem when doing review on Github
> > for me is, that we usually create new revisions. Therefore we don't see
> > what's changed in new revision versus previous revision. 
> That's my main concern with the current behaviour: a "git diff" often doesn't show a diff against the previous (ebuild) file, it shows a diff against /dev/null :-/

Indeed, on GitHub it is hard to review, but locally you can add

[diff]
        algorithm = patience

to your .gitconfig, and that should help with the diffs even when
the revision changes by moving the file. When copying, it probably
won't help.

We could also try as a policy to split the revision bump from the
changes, i.e. bump the revision in the first commit, then apply the
changes in a second one. That way, one can click on the right commit
to see the differences only, even on GitHub. Then we can squash when
merging locally, since we don't click merge on GitHub anyway.

Cheers,
-Guilherme