Development Flow Improvements
jamie.couture at gmail.com
Tue Sep 27 23:05:27 CEST 2016
I'm curious whether there is a merge policy in place for those *for-jason
branches. Will they be fast forward only or reasonable they may be reset
since it's really just a contract for you and the person providing the
series, rather than something others should be following.
For example. In git.git it is understood that special topics 'pu' are reset
On Tuesday, 27 September 2016, Jason A. Donenfeld <Jason at zx2c4.com> wrote:
> Hey folks,
> I wanted to update you on a conversation a few of us have been having
> off-list. In order to hasten the speed of development, we're making
> some changes to the way things are done.
> All submitted patch series will now live in feature branches. Each
> feature branch will be owned by either me (jd), John (jk), Christian
> (ch), Ferry (fh), Lukas (lf), or Lars (lh), and will be titled
> something like "jk/add-links-to-header". After enough review, and the
> feature is ready to land, it will be put into the owner's "for-jason"
> branch -- such as "ch/for-jason". Then, when I'm ready, I'll review
> and sweep up all the various */for-jason branches (including my own!)
> into master, and sometime after that cut a release.
> This should pick up the pace a little bit, because it enables any of
> us to more easily review a patch series and get it ready for final
> inclusion. So, if you submit a patch series, and you get a reply from
> me, John, Christian, Ferry, Lukas, or Lars, saying something like,
> "I'll review this," it means it should shortly after wind up in a
> feature branch on <https://git.zx2c4.com/cgit/>.
> I think this will work out well. Looking forward to finally see some
> patches land.
> CGit mailing list
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the CGit