Julian Foad wrote on Thu, Apr 07, 2022 at 12:43:03 +0100:
> TL;DR: are we OK to merge the pristines feature
> ('pristines-on-demand-on-mwf' branch) to trunk soon, like early next week?
>
> As said in "A status review" [1] in the long thread "A two-part vision
> for Subversion and large binary objects.", next steps are reviewing and
> handling the outstanding issues, and proposing merge to trunk. I think
> these can be done in parallel as I don't see any that would block a
> merge to trunk. So here is the proposal to merge to trunk, and then
> complete the remaining work on trunk.
>
> It feels to me like there is general consensus that this feature is
> taking a form that will be acceptable for a first release of it (while
> not perfect), and consensus for proceeding to get it into trunk and
> subsequently including it in the next release. I'm too close to it to
> make an independent assessment. Can anybody else comment?
>
Although I've done some work on the branch, and did at points diff to
trunk for a specific thing I was working on at the time, at no point did
I do a complete start-to-finish review, as would be needed before
a merge. So, please do *not* count me as an implicit +1.
Also, I'd be wary of merging the branch to trunk so long as there are
blockers, unless whoever does the merge is certain they will have
sufficient (round) tuits to fix those blockers in a timely manner.
Cheers,
Daniel
> If no objections, I plan to merge to trunk early next week.
>
> [1] on dev@, 2022-04-05,
> https://lists.apache.org/thread/lm98og8jqonffcs250q5y3ft5r5qlmk5
>
