Daniel Veillard <veillard@redhat.com> wrote: ...
In general I like the approach 'let's put what we consider fine first and discuss other parts later' . I guess it's the third round of review and I really find easier to comment based on existing stuff than big patches that gets iterated over time. So let's isolate what we consider okay and not needing further discussion, push them now, than in an upcoming fourth iteration,
Yes, monolithic patches are hard to manage, and it's not effective to re-review from scratch a 10,000-line diff when the incremental diff is say just 1/10 the size. For that reason, I've been pulling from Dan's hg patch queue on an irregular basis, and importing the result into a git repository, putting each "pulled batch" on a new branch. Then, I can compare one batch to another with a simple git diff t7..t8 If only I had pulled a little more frequently over the last week or two. My final incremental is summarized like this: $ git diff --shortstat t8..t9-public 74 files changed, 2156 insertions(+), 9861 deletions(-)