Re: [PATCH] Test for recent rev-parse $abbrev_sha1 regression

From: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
Date: May 30, 2007, 06:28 UTC
Message-ID: <7vzm3m3jvp.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net>
In-Reply-To: <20070530055806.GQ7044@spearce.org>

"Shawn O. Pearce" <spearce@spearce.org> writes:

> But to me, anything that hits 'next' that breaks Git this badly is
> a regression.  Why?  Because I run my production repositories off
> next, that's why.  Of course I do this to exercise next more fully...
> to prevent this sort of stuff from getting to master.  ;-)

I'm almost always on 'next'. I switch to run 'master' a few days before -rc0 and a few days after the final feature release I switch back to 'next'.

The tip of 'next' may not be perfect, but it should not be so broken that it is beyond a quick repair to inconvenience users that rely on 'next' working. And it helps us catch problems before the topics hit 'master'.

Because the tip of 'master' gets tagged only once every 6 weeks or so, its tip is not an official release at any other times, but we effectively have the usual pre-release QA continuously running on the stuff that hits 'master'. That's what 'next' is all about.

And that's how we can keep our 'master' a lot more robust than the development branches of other open source projects.