Re: What's cooking in git/spearce.git (topics)

From: Theodore Tso <tytso@mit.edu>
Date: Oct 23, 2007, 04:56 UTC
Message-ID: <20071023045632.GD27132@thunk.org>
In-Reply-To: <20071023044657.GC14735@spearce.org>

On Tue, Oct 23, 2007 at 12:46:57AM -0400, Shawn O. Pearce wrote:

Show 10 quoted lines

> By merging only individual topics forked from master into next you
> can merge those individual topics into master at different points
> in time.  For example db/fetch-pack has been in next for many weeks
> and hasn't yet merged into master, yet jc/am-quiet was forked after
> db/fetch-pack started and has already merged into master.
> 
> Your way would make jc/am-quiet wait until db/fetch-pack was ready.
> That's a big risk in the sense that your tree is "blocked" and even
> simple changes are held up by ones that suddenly became a lot more
> complex then you originally thought they were going to be.

Yes, true. Alternatively, what I've been doing is that if I wasn't sure that a particular topic was ready to go to 'master' very shortly after it went into 'next', I would never let it go into 'next', but rather keep it in 'pu' (which is OK, because pu is constantly getting rewound). But I guess the downside of that is you might get fewer testers for the code, because fewer people are probably tracking and testing 'pu' as compared to 'next'.

Right?

					- Ted