On Monday, 16 July 2012 at 19:35:47 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu
wrote:
[snip]
I agree this would be more direct. But I fail to see how Walter
cherry-picking stuff is "basically no additional work", whereas
Adam doing essentially the same is an unenviable "amount of
labor".
He wouldn't be cherry-picking anything. All he'd have to do is a
checkout (one command) before switching between working on
features (and by features I mean breaking or major changes) or
bugs. Adam, on the other hand, would be running git cherry-pick
over and over dodging changes he determines are too risky to
include in stable. It also seems like there is a lot more room
for mistakes to be made doing it this way.
Besides, if Walter is at the same time doing things and
deciding their category may work worse than a small team making
the assessment by consensus.
Perhaps. More eyes are better. It just seems like way more work
than is necessary to accomplish the goal of isolating breaking
changes so that stable releases can go out easier. The end result
is all I'm interested in personally since I'm not the one doing
the work here. I'm not too concerned with whether you use my idea
or not. I just thought you guys might like to hear an alternative
that is much easier for you while remaining easy for Walter.
Regards,
Brad Anderson