| I used a stacking review system at two other roles (gerrit and phabriactor). At the time I found it annoying and missed the pretty Github UI and the ability to bunch commits together. Now that I'm using Github full time, I miss the stack. I found stacks allowed me to easily commit for a few problems at once without bogging down a reviewer. It sounds like you're already a fan of PRs being small, and that probably means _doing one thing_. What about a spelling mistake in a nearby but unrelated comment? That probably should be a separate PR. In the stack-world, I was happy to make a second commit, create a second review artifact, and be OK with it shipping eventually when the other features of my commit ship (especially if they're close enough to cause a merge conflict!) Today, I have to:
* Stash/commit -m temp my current work
* Checkout a new branch, make the fix, push it up, make a PR, etc.
* Check back out my old work, potentially rebase on top of it if it's going to cause a merge conflict
* get back to work on the real issue
* Create a PR for the real issue... and hopefully not have it reviewed until the doc fix is already merged, because it's going to show up as an unrelated change here anyway! There's also merge-into-other-branches that might help with this workflow, but I haven't found anything graceful yet. In practice, I avoid the documentation fix to avoid the change in flow, when I'd have been happy to just have it as a different commit in the stack. -- that covers more generically why I like stacks, I'm not sure graphite would solve my problems after reading the OP though. |