From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Thomas Adam Subject: Re: Help using git I'm review process Date: Sun, 24 Jul 2011 13:16:00 +0100 Message-ID: References: <245B4B40-CA0A-43F6-A3F0-85E50D75CB93@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Cc: "git@vger.kernel.org" To: Mathew Benson X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Sun Jul 24 14:16:21 2011 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.180.67]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1QkxbY-0005S7-Rq for gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org; Sun, 24 Jul 2011 14:16:21 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752581Ab1GXMQR convert rfc822-to-quoted-printable (ORCPT ); Sun, 24 Jul 2011 08:16:17 -0400 Received: from mail-qy0-f181.google.com ([209.85.216.181]:52080 "EHLO mail-qy0-f181.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752515Ab1GXMQP convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Sun, 24 Jul 2011 08:16:15 -0400 Received: by qyk9 with SMTP id 9so1998790qyk.19 for ; Sun, 24 Jul 2011 05:16:15 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from:date :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:to:cc:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=pTN2XzqqLIOtyEuy+P5beQInLY3xGr9ipVpykE3pIRU=; b=NCYkH6WKuCEnggr++MURMnF0mQcVCaKsfsRD2Fd94N5JTYHxLxW2bq0XuECyU8T27H cP+iL2ObuT7jma9zAHSV9pc/U+tytMLbsj+D8gi81Q2bEFLt91IBwsnELORMCQ3o5AKO L8b7XsOagHGL9byb4xH4qDl4w8Z00dHBNahNQ= Received: by 10.229.37.71 with SMTP id w7mr2841619qcd.15.1311509775207; Sun, 24 Jul 2011 05:16:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.229.95.210 with HTTP; Sun, 24 Jul 2011 05:16:00 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <245B4B40-CA0A-43F6-A3F0-85E50D75CB93@gmail.com> X-Google-Sender-Auth: RZ8hKQhgafUnVgo1m7uofY7hC0c Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On 24 July 2011 13:12, Mathew Benson wrote: > I'm planning to use git for a work project, which requires tight cont= rol of the peer review process. =C2=A0In previous jobs, the peer review= was a tedious manual process of creating PDF files, writing comments i= n spreadsheets, and copying comments to the CM system. =C2=A0I want to = use technology to my best advantage. > > Once a developer has completed all his changes in his development bra= nch, what's the best way to get those files to the reviewers, without r= equiring the author to stop work? =C2=A0First, I think I should create = a tag in the developer branch. =C2=A0Each developer has a local reposit= ory, and my review tool writes files directly in the work area. =C2=A0C= an they just fetch, checkout a tag (don't know how to do that), commit = changes, and push it back to the central repository? =C2=A0Is there a b= etter workflow?-- This is what Gerrit is useful for. -- Thomas Adam