logoalt Hacker News

skydhashyesterday at 7:37 PM2 repliesview on HN

Let's say that Z has an error (some assumption that does not hold), and needed to be reverted. How does that impact X's viability? I wouldn't trust any reviews of X after that.

I strongly believe that PR should be compared to the main branch, and not rely on unmerged code. Unless you merge everything together in one go. And in the latter case, everything should be reviewed together.


Replies

a_t48yesterday at 7:50 PM

I think the answer is - it depends! This is why we make good money. I don’t think there’s a hard and fast rule here to apply.

makeitdoubleyesterday at 10:29 PM

If the tooling allows rollbacking X, Y and Z as a set, it could make sense ?

I'm also on the "compare to the main branch" camp in general, but will sometimes end up with a set of X,Y,Z branches that have different purposes but all depend on X.

More often than not, the base dependency is a set of constants or additional class/methods that could be released with no impact (no reference in live code) but still need a somewhat lenghty review process. Reverts would be happening on the higher level PRs, which hopefully are independent.