Return-Path: X-Original-To: notmuch@notmuchmail.org Delivered-To: notmuch@notmuchmail.org Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by olra.theworths.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2132B41ED98 for ; Fri, 1 Jul 2011 17:51:18 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at olra.theworths.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.29 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.29 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, T_MIME_NO_TEXT=0.01] autolearn=disabled Received: from olra.theworths.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (olra.theworths.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id MEX2VjgUJzBP for ; Fri, 1 Jul 2011 17:51:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: from tempo.its.unb.ca (tempo.its.unb.ca [131.202.1.21]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by olra.theworths.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6279F41ED9B for ; Fri, 1 Jul 2011 17:51:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: from zancas.localnet (fctnnbsc30w-142167176081.pppoe-dynamic.High-Speed.nb.bellaliant.net [142.167.176.81]) (authenticated bits=0) by tempo.its.unb.ca (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id p61NlFNf014219 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Fri, 1 Jul 2011 20:47:16 -0300 Received: from bremner by zancas.localnet with local (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1QcnQY-0005zw-Px; Fri, 01 Jul 2011 20:47:14 -0300 From: David Bremner To: Keith Packard , notmuch@notmuchmail.org Subject: Re: branchs and tags and merges oh my! In-Reply-To: References: <87y60hn0mg.fsf@zancas.localnet> User-Agent: Notmuch/0.6 (http://notmuchmail.org) Emacs/23.3.1 (x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) Date: Fri, 01 Jul 2011 20:47:04 -0300 Message-ID: <87tyb5mumf.fsf@zancas.localnet> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature" X-BeenThere: notmuch@notmuchmail.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13 Precedence: list List-Id: "Use and development of the notmuch mail system." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 02 Jul 2011 00:51:18 -0000 --=-=-= Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Fri, 01 Jul 2011 14:48:24 -0700, Keith Packard wrote: > > 2) merge master onto the release branch >=20 > This makes doing 'bug fix' stuff on top of 0.6 a bit more challenging. Can you elaborate? Naively it seems like one ends up with the same kind of spur of history off of the 0.6 tag in both cases. =2D---.--------------master \ ---- 0.6 ---- bugfix versus =2D----.----------. \ \=20 ---- 0.6--------master \ ----- bugfix > As an alternative, you probably should have simply put non-release > patches on a separate 'feature branch' (probably residing in the feature > author's repository) which would then be merged onto master post-0.6 Yes, that is certainly nice from a git history point of view. On the other hand the point of separating the roles of feature merger from release mechanic was to allow Carl more time to work on merging features into master, and I'm not sure how turning master over to the release manager helps that. David --=-=-= Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux) iJwEAQECAAYFAk4OXHgACgkQTiiN/0Um85lbKQQAg2BbIQ4pJ8n14zV4fVUG6dOE UgxlFFCddhdWEbizz4ROCl6uhS/FQ4ytBp73k++btS3P5DExVke8qJ2RCcaNmB98 nzfk/YACsRiPnm+86CzjL9tF0U1Bgl7L0hXdce4rXqJpXu6SDXEWlFuK5vjCAFBc Nh2HEiRH04jigJgSAUI= =vbBP -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-=-=--