Homec4science
Diffusion Phabricator (stable) Browse

phab/src/docs/userguide/differential_large_changes.diviner
1bf8180d6518stable

Last Change
Raw File

differential_large_changes.diviner
View Options

@title Differential User Guide: Large Changes
@group userguide
Dealing with huge changesets, and when **not** to use Differential.
= Overview =
When you want code review for a given changeset, Differential is not always the
right tool to use. The rule of thumb is that you should only send changes to
Differential if you expect humans to review the actual differences in the source
code from the web interface. This should cover the vast majority of changes but,
for example, you usually should //not// submit changes like these through
Differential:
- Committing an entire open source project to a private repo somewhere so
you can fork it or link against it.
- Committing an enormous text datafile, like a list of every English word or a
dump of a database.
- Making a trivial (e.g., find/replace) edit to 10,000 files.
You can still try submitting these kinds of changes, but you may encounter
problems getting them to work (database or connection timeouts, for example).
Differential is pretty fast and scalable, but at some point either it or the
browser will break down: you simply can't show nine million files on a webpage.
More importantly, in all these cases, the text of the changes won't be reviewed
by a human. The metadata associated with the change is what needs review (e.g.,
what are you checking in, where are you putting it, and why? Does the change
make sense? In the case of automated transformations, what script did you use?).
To get review for these types of changes, one of these strategies will usually
work better than trying to get the entire change into Differential:
- Send an email/AIM/IRC to your reviewer(s) like "Hey, I'm going to check in
the source for MySQL 9.3.1 to /full/path/to/whatever. The change is staged
in /home/whatever/path/somewhere if you want to take a look. Can I put your
name on the review?". This is best for straightforward changes. The reviewer
is not going to review MySQL's source itself, instead they are reviewing the
change metadata: which version are you checking in, why are you checking it
in, and where are you putting it?
- Create a Differential revision with only the metadata, like the script you
used to make automated changes or a text file explaining what you're doing,
and maybe a sample of some of the changes if they were automated. Include a
link to where the changes are staged so reviewers can look at the actual
changeset if they want to. This is best for more complicated changes, since
Differential can still be used for discussion and provide a permanent record
others can refer to.
In both cases, you won't be able to use "arc commit" or "arc amend" to actually
push the change. Just use "svn" or "git" and manually edit the commit message
instead. (It is normally sufficient to add a "Reviewed By: <username>" field.)
These kinds of changes are generally rare and don't have much in common, which
is why there's no explicit support for them in Differential. If you frequently
run into cases which Differential doesn't handle, let us know what they are.
c4science · Help