[dmd-beta] Cherry-picking II

[Jesse Phillips]

Well, my opinion is that the quest to find a "simple" process is leading to
reinventing the wheel with a fork and a spoon rather than a hammer and
chisel. This new issue is not a new problem and would have been addressed
with the appropriate process of creating pull requests against the release
branch, or even merging to the release branch instead of master. But there
seems to be some confusion about this (now that it has come up as a
replacement for writing notes back and forth).

In your last email you took issue of adding a second review step, when the
first doesn't get any attention. This is wrong, dead wrong. There should
not be two reviews, there should only ever be one single pull request and
that request should get the review.

Yes, this approach does require involvement of the patch contributors, but
that is already true. The contributor is already tackling regressions for
the new release, so they're already aware of where this fix needs to go. It
just requires them to check out the release branch on the three repos
before starting.

Even if the developers don't wish to push the request against release, they
can still leave a comment on the Pull request (against master) stating this
should go into release. At this point the pull request is NOT merged into
master, instead it is merged into the release branch. This approach has the
negative that the fix may not be complete or have merge conflicts due to
dependency on previous changes (this would be where a comment should be
left and request that the issues be addressed).

Once the release is complete, merge it back into master (this can actually
be done at any time, but should always be done at the end of release).


On Sun, Feb 2, 2014 at 9:29 AM, Andrew Edwards <edwards.ac at gmail.com> wrote:

> So this is where the discussion ends? No decision or further
> communication. All forward action suggest the status quo. We honestly need
> to do something here gents. Were it my decision to make, would have been
> handled on day one but since it's not, I need your participation.
>
> Kenji, need you take a look at dmd/pull/#3140 and see what kind of
> problems will occur it is merged after #3103, #3151, #3174, and #3169
> respectively.
>
> Thanks,
> Andrew
>
> _______________________________________________
> dmd-beta mailing list
> dmd-beta at puremagic.com
> http://lists.puremagic.com/mailman/listinfo/dmd-beta
>



-- 
Jesse Phillips
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.puremagic.com/pipermail/dmd-beta/attachments/20140202/1f0d16ec/attachment.html>