On 08/03/10 14:19, Paul W. Frields wrote:
Something I had failed to predict about mailing commits to the list is
there's no easy way to tell which commit is destined for which
repository. :-) Perhaps we should settle on another procedure.

So here's what I'd suggest, in cases where you're not authorized to
push your commits to a repository (and don't want to wait for access
to send your patch):

1. If there's a bug in Bugzilla for the problem, attach the commit
   there.  Note that attaching a patch is not the same as just pasting
   it into a comment field.  Use the 'Add an attachment' function
   instead to keep the bug easy to read.  (The 'git format-patch
   HEAD^' command will make a nice patch file for you to attach.)

2. Add the 'Patch' keyword to the bug, which indicates a patch is
   attached to fix the problem.

3. If there's no bug for the problem, file one and then go to step
   1. :-)

What do you guys think?

  
Sounds like a great procedure to me! The only annoying thing is that if you don't push the patch to the git repo yourself, then every time you sync with the repo you have to resolve the conflicts between the edits you've made to your local copy and the patches that you've submitted and have been merged by someone else. Unless there's a workaround to avoid this?

Nathan