On Sat, 11 Nov 2017, Jed Brown wrote: > Removing next without a reliable substitute that ensures quality control > would be a disaster for the stability of 'master', and thus for everyone > trying to develop new features. That's what we had before switching to > Git and it was a mess.
Sorry if I gave you the impression that what was discussed was going back to our old (master-only) model. The initial reference [one liner] didn't have details - so it was perhaps misleading. But in my subsequent e-mails - I've explained one way of interpreting it reference to stuff like - for eg: [copy/paste from prior e-mail] >>>>>>. Also if feature-1 and feature-2 are feature branches that are tested in next [wrt integration]. The following should be equivalent to testing 'master + feature1 + feature2' - aka current next model: 1. test master+feature1 2. success => merge feature1 to master 3. tests master+ feature2 3. success => merge feature2 to master <<<<<<< Satish
