On 1 Jun 2009, at 21:00, Chris Anderson wrote:
Devs,
We've talked some about discontinuing use of svn's merge/block
procedure for maintaining old release branches, in favor just asking
committers to remember to put applicable patches into the 0.9.x
branch.
There is discussion to be had about what patches are applicable to
point release branches.
Perspectives?
we'd need to see why we have that procedure. My understanding was
to give a release manager a "list of outstanding commits" that haven't
been looked at for merging to a branch. Which basically is a safety net
for sloppy committers who don't merge stuff to a branch (or do it wrong
like Adam (sorry, no picking, here, just as an example). So it is a form
of validation.
The opposite site of that coin is, that if a patch doesn't go into a
branch
the first time it is committed, it doesn't belong in the (any) branch,
because
the developer actively chose to not merge the patch into a branch.
I don't mind the extra process, but we need to make sure we know
why we're doing it and I might have missed some or *the* point.
Noah?
Cheers
Jan
--
