[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Gnu-arch-users] State of the Merges

From: Robin Farine
Subject: Re: [Gnu-arch-users] State of the Merges
Date: Mon, 20 Sep 2004 13:04:14 +0200
User-agent: KMail/1.6.2

On Monday 20 September 2004 04.22, James Blackwell wrote:


> >> Also: that's definately something to tighten up (automate)
> >> once we're using a PQM.
> >
> > Already done, phoad handles all that stuff. That's essentially
> > what it is: a PQM layered over bug goo.
> I'm sorry Andrew. I'm not planning on using a PQM at this point.
> PQMs don't work well right now because of the the
> crossed-star-merge edge case.  We''ll have to hold off until
> somebody can come up with a good fix for that.

In this precise case, the problem you mention can be avoided by a 
controlled patch flow: contributors versions --> PQM versions --> 
integration version. During the merge fest, the integration version 
remains closed to contributors. As the mergeable requests have been 
merged into the integration version, a new revision of this 
integration version becomes open to the contributors.  Any merge 
request that does not contain a patch log for this revision has to 
be updated before it can be merged (this could be enforced by the 

In the case of a patch flow between two versions (ddaa's example), a 
merge token could be associated with each pair of developer and 
integration versions. The token would be passed along with a merge 
request and passed back when the request has been handled (merged 
or rejected). The rule being that merging from the other version is 
only allowed while one owns the token associated with this pair.


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]