<p><br>
On Jul 2, 2011 10:28 p.m., "Glyph Lefkowitz" <<a href="mailto:glyph@twistedmatrix.com">glyph@twistedmatrix.com</a>> wrote:<br>
><br>
><br>
> On Jul 2, 2011, at 1:07 PM, Michael Thompson wrote:<br>
><br>
>> On 1 July 2011 18:38, Glyph Lefkowitz <<a href="mailto:glyph@twistedmatrix.com">glyph@twistedmatrix.com</a>> wrote:<br>
><br>
><br>
>> I think github means less effort for the reviewer because they can<br>
>> review commits, rather than a large diff. They can review changes<br>
>> following a review.<br>
><br>
><br>
> I already review diffs this way, with a local bzr-svn branch using 'bzr merge; bzr qlog'. Better yet I just sometimes do this on a plane :).<br>
></p>
<p>Is that reviewing Svn branches what about text patches?</p>
<p>If I address three review comments sending in three patch files seems like a hassle for me and the reviewer and could lead to more delays in the review process.</p>