Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

A Better Model for Stacked Pull Requests

timothyandrew.dev

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–64 of 64 posts

Re: A Better Model for Stacked Pull Requests

#61

Post by cyphactor »

ezyang wrote: post #59
cyphactor wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In my opinion git-ps provides a much nicer patch workflow similar to Phabricator while still supporting GitHub, Bitbucket, or GitLab for peer reviews. * https://github.com/uptech/git-ps * a detailed walkthrough https://upte.ch/blog/how-we-should-be-using-git/

I definitely miss hg’s affordances like hg next/prev and restack. It doesn’t look like, though, that git-ps lets you submit multiple patches for review, this was the raison d’etre for ghstack

We are working on support for requesting review of a series of patches right now. But generally you want to avoid that and get your individual patches reviewed as early as possible anyways.

Re: A Better Model for Stacked Pull Requests

#62

Post by jasonpeacock »

tta wrote: post #39
jasonpeacock wrote: post #2

I'm still reading the article, but it looks like there's a typo where it refers to: Merge in the stack from top to bottom - in this case we're going to merge Feature 3's PR, Feature 2's PR, and Feature 1's PR, in that order, using GitHub's UI. But the "top to bottom" would be merging F1, then F2, then F3 (and you'd have to rebase & re-upstream each as you go).

This is good feedback, thank you! I intend "top" to mean "the PR furthest from `master`" and "bottom" to mean "the PR closest to `master`". I'll add a section clarifying this nomenclature.

My confusion comes from the associated image, where the top of the list is F1, and the bottom of list is F3.

Maybe a new image of the branches with the list order reversed?

Re: A Better Model for Stacked Pull Requests

#63

Post by ezyang »

cyphactor wrote: post #61
ezyang wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I definitely miss hg’s affordances like hg next/prev and restack. It doesn’t look like, though, that git-ps lets you submit multiple patches for review, this was the raison d’etre for ghstack

We are working on support for requesting review of a series of patches right now. But generally you want to avoid that and get your individual patches reviewed as early as possible anyways.

Doesn't help when it can take several days to land! (e.g., waiting for CI.) But I will admit this is a problem that is somewhat specific to the nature of our project :)
Post reply on HN