Re: Git ticket / issue tracking ERA: Git shouldn't allow to push a new branch called HEAD
- From
Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
- Date
- Nov 22, 2011, 19:46 UTC
- Message-ID
- <7v8vn8djo1.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org>
- In-Reply-To
- <1321977372.3289.38.camel@mastroc3.mobc3.local>
Daniele Segato <daniele.bilug@gmail.com> writes:
Show 9 quoted lines
> Let me explain my idea with an example: > > An issue is discussed, a bug is acknowledged and a proposed solution is > discussed, this all happen in the mailing list, like it always has. > > Someone in the "git management" (the one that usually choose how git > should evolve) open a ticket, copy the relevant part of the mailing list > (or link to the discussion in the archive) and (optionally) place the > bug / feature / enhancement into a roadmap / milestone
This step I wouldn't buy, if you count me as part of "management".
But I suspect that curation of issues, prodding parties involved and closing inactive/stale ones can be done by volunteer project secretaries without requiring an authority to choose how git should evolve.
cf. http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.git/110117/focus=110129