[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Incorrect merge
From: |
Óscar Fuentes |
Subject: |
Re: Incorrect merge |
Date: |
Tue, 02 Nov 2010 19:56:29 +0100 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.0.50 (gnu/linux) |
"Stephen J. Turnbull" <address@hidden> writes:
> > Adding an extra branch does not increase the current workload.
>
> Of course it does. Most occasional developers work only on the branch
> that they use every day, either trunk or stable/maintenance. That's
> where they test, that's where they refine. Adding the common-fixes
> branch means they need to clone and maintain that branch, and work in
> a branch that they don't use.
Almost every change on emacs-23 is intended to trunk too. Right now
those changes that are exclusive to emacs-23 must be flagged
somehow. Adding common-fixes just means that people working on emacs-23
will work on common-fixes, except for those cases where they would flag
the change as belonging to emacs-23 only. Not so hard, IMO.
> Even for frequent contributors who help with porting patches back and
> forth between the branches, this requires more thinking about where
> you should do the work.
Uh? With common-fixes you merge the commits there into emacs-23 and
trunk. That's all.
> > They would commit to common-fixes the same way they do for emacs-23.
>
> You mean, stuff that doesn't belong there, as started this thread? ;-)
The problem was that commits intended to emacs-23 were merged into
trunk. Yes, people can do all kinds of mistakes, but no script will
magically avoid them.
[snip]
> > when there are standard practices on dVCS for properly solving the
> > problem at hand.
>
> But there aren't. Only Darcs supports cherry-picking properly.
You are missing the point. common-fixes will eliminate the need for
cherry-picking (and for examining each commit on emacs-23 before merging
into trunk). The maintainers save time and the VC history is consistent
(with commits maintaining its identity on the branches where they are
installed)
[snip]
- Re: Incorrect merge, (continued)
- Re: Incorrect merge, Eli Zaretskii, 2010/11/01
- Re: Incorrect merge, Juanma Barranquero, 2010/11/01
- Re: Incorrect merge, Eli Zaretskii, 2010/11/01
- Re: Incorrect merge, Juanma Barranquero, 2010/11/01
- Re: Incorrect merge, Stephen J. Turnbull, 2010/11/01
- Re: Incorrect merge, Stefan Monnier, 2010/11/02
- Re: Incorrect merge, Óscar Fuentes, 2010/11/02
- Re: Incorrect merge, Stephen J. Turnbull, 2010/11/02
- Re: Incorrect merge, Óscar Fuentes, 2010/11/02
- Re: Incorrect merge, Stephen J. Turnbull, 2010/11/02
- Re: Incorrect merge,
Óscar Fuentes <=
- Re: Incorrect merge, Stephen J. Turnbull, 2010/11/02
- Re: Incorrect merge, Óscar Fuentes, 2010/11/02
- Re: Incorrect merge, Stephen J. Turnbull, 2010/11/03
- Re: Incorrect merge, Óscar Fuentes, 2010/11/03
- Re: Incorrect merge, Stephen J. Turnbull, 2010/11/03
- Re: Incorrect merge, Stefan Monnier, 2010/11/03
- Re: Incorrect merge, Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen, 2010/11/04
- Re: Incorrect merge, Andreas Schwab, 2010/11/05
- Re: Incorrect merge, Eli Zaretskii, 2010/11/05
- Re: Incorrect merge, Stefan Monnier, 2010/11/08