Re: [oe-commits] Koen Kooi : angstrom 2009.X: bump automake-native to 1.10. 2 since some idiot deleted 1.10

[Otavio Salvador <otavio@ossystems.com.br>]

Michael 'Mickey' Lauer <mickey@vanille-media.de> writes:

> Am Mittwoch, den 04.03.2009, 11:54 +0100 schrieb Koen Kooi:
>> On 04-03-09 11:21, Michael 'Mickey' Lauer wrote:
>> > Am Mittwoch, den 04.03.2009, 09:59 +0000 schrieb Martyn Welch:
>> >> "Review" is defined as posting it on the mailing lists and getting positive agreement from two or more core developers.
>> >
>> > Let me propose these kinds of patches being promoted in an unstable
>> > branch rather than via mailing list. This eases testing and playing
>> > around with the patch.
>> 
>> Patches posted to the mailinglist get more eyes on them.
>
> More eyes but less actual testing, since it involves patching your
> current tree to be able to see the effects.
>
>> > Although there were 0 comments (among those none in favour, but also
>> > none against), I still think that org.oe.{stable,testing(dev),unstable}
>> > with a strict only-cherry-picking-from-right-to-left-allowed policy
>> > would improve our workflow and overall stability.
>> 
>> That will just boil down to people only using stable or testing
>
> All but those who actually work on the branch -- which sounds like a
> good thing to me, since that's what stable and testing are about.

I belive this can be fixed using a merge window and using a pull based
model.

Instead of we do pushes against devel branch, core devels could do the
pull and we could have a -next tree the pulls automatically and reports
conflicts by mail. This is more or less what is done in Linux nowadays.

-- 
Otavio Salvador                  O.S. Systems
E-mail: otavio@ossystems.com.br  http://www.ossystems.com.br
Mobile: +55 53 9981-7854         http://projetos.ossystems.com.br