Hacker News Reader

The term Stacked PRs already sounds like a term that was invented specifically in order to communicate in a GitHub-influenced context. Because Stacked PRs are just a reinvention of being able to review a commit at a time (the stack part is straightforward).

View on HN

Stacked PRs are like being able to review a commit at a time, but add an additional layer of sequencing. It's most simply thought of as a patch series, where the evolution of each 'patch' is retained.

That additional layer allows finer grained history and to mostly avoid (unreviewed) rebasing. Many teams find those properties valuable.

In this day and age I don’t understand why we just can’t call tings commits instead of patches or changesets.

I guess another pet peeve for me.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41659650

Stacked PRs is a way to surface the lifetime of the proposition as they get fixed or updated following reviews.

It has nothing to do with github.

It has nothing to do with GitHub in the sense that GitHub does not support it (I guess, I’m not up to touch). It does have something to do with GitHub in the sense that the name (PRs) and the benefits are framed from the standpoint of This is What GitHub Lacks.

Which is a GitHub-centric perspective.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41514663

Reply on news.ycombinator.com