[Insight-developers] ITK / Gerrit question

[Marcus D. Hanwell]

Hi Bill,

I agree that we should have it, but have not had sufficient time to
get Gerrit master built, and make/test the change. I am also working
on something else that Luis wanted for the upcoming meeting that would
make checking out the changes locally much less of a requirement.

This is using a combination of the CDash at Home work with Gerrit. So
instead of listing who has what compilers/OSes you could simply
volunteer a machine for CDash at Home ITK testing, when someone submits a
patch to Gerrit a request for a Windows, Linux and Mac build is added
to the queue and a hyperlink inserted into the Gerrit commit page.

I would like to take a step back and examine why you tend to have so
many topics checked out? Is it because you want to build them/run the
tests, run KWStyle or something else? I had been concentrating on
increased automation as I think this is the way to go.

In answer to your other question - yes Gerrit uses Gerrit to
review/accept patches. I have not submitted a patch there yet, but
once I have this change I would submit it there. Quite limited time at
the moment, and so I have not been able to get to this.

Marcus

On Thu, Nov 4, 2010 at 4:42 PM, Bill Lorensen <bill.lorensen at gmail.com> wrote:
> Marcus,
>
> Do we have a resolution on this? I sometimes have several gerrit
> requests.  I currently do the manual cut and paste. Have you checked
> with the gerrit folks?
>
> Bill
>
> On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 6:46 PM, Marcus D. Hanwell
> <marcus.hanwell at kitware.com> wrote:
>> I see your point, and realize we all work differently - let me look into this.
>>
>> Marcus
>>
>> On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 6:36 PM, Hans Johnson <hans-johnson at uiowa.edu> wrote:
>>> I agree.  I do this all the time too.  When I am not on the "no branch"
>>> branch, I don't know what I'm working on, and that seems dangerous to me.
>>>
>>> On 10/26/10 2:43 PM, "Bill Lorensen" <bill.lorensen at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Some of us are doing multiple reviews at the same time. And some of us
>>>> always make a branch when we are reviewing.
>>>>
>>>> Also, a branch is useful if you are going to push another user's
>>>> gerrit patch to the stage.
>>>>
>>>> Right now, I manually do a git checkout -b topic_name and I cut the
>>>> topic name from the gerrit page so that I don't misspell it.
>>>>
>>>> I would find this very useful.
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 1:21 PM, Marcus D. Hanwell
>>>> <marcus.hanwell at kitware.com> wrote:
>>>>> On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 11:40 AM, Luis Ibanez <luis.ibanez at kitware.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi Marcus,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> At the ITK tcon we were wondering if we could modify our installation of
>>>>>> Gerrit
>>>>>> to have the git command line create a branch with the topic that is just
>>>>>> checked out.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> so, to change:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> git fetch ssh://ibanez@review.source.kitware.com:29418/ITK
>>>>>> refs/changes/34/234/1
>>>>>> && git checkout FETCH_HEAD
>>>>>>
>>>>>> into
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> git fetch ssh://ibanez@review.source.kitware.com:29418/ITK
>>>>>> refs/changes/34/234/1
>>>>>> && git checkout FETCH_HEAD -b topic-name
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Do you think this could be done ?
>>>>>>
>>>>> I think it could be done, but the majority of the time when reviewing
>>>>> a topic branch there is no need to make it into a named topic branch.
>>>>> You only really need to assign it a name if you are going to stage it,
>>>>> and merge it. Then a,
>>>>>
>>>>> git checkout -b topic-name
>>>>>
>>>>> Would give you that from the detached head. You still need to ensure
>>>>> you are at the tip of the topic, and most of the time I would rather
>>>>> have the current behavior. I can take a look and see where the change
>>>>> would be required, and how likely it is that it would be accepted
>>>>> upstream (as we would rather not maintain a patched version of Gerrit
>>>>> long term).
>>>>>
>>
>