[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: gnuarch 1.2.1 released! (reannouncement)
From: |
Tom Lord |
Subject: |
Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: gnuarch 1.2.1 released! (reannouncement) |
Date: |
Mon, 16 Aug 2004 11:45:03 -0700 (PDT) |
> From: address@hidden (James Blackwell)
> If you have bug fixes, minor features, and other otherwise "safe" stuff,
> then tag off of me. I have a ~ 1 month cycle: 2 weeks for merges, 2+
> weeks for code freeze. If a bug is found in an rc, then a new rc is
> shipped, and the freeze clock restarts.
I'm glad you mentioned that on-list --- I forgot to.
I think that that regularity is a huge, huge win and is one of the
more important aspects of the shift in project process that's taking
place.
> If you are doing changes to furth, xl-whatever, etc, then tag off of -t
> and send patches that way.
There should not be any sending of patches in particular directions!
*ALL* patches should go through BugGoo. You, jblack, should be
working off of buggoo.
Now, sure... if there's a neglected patch in buggoo and you want to
ping somebody, then Jblack's directions make sense (and hopefully that
is more like what he meant).
Jblack: I'd be in favor of a PQM-ish policy that *all* changes must
have an associated buggoo issue which includes a merge request for the
changes. Would you be willing to require that?
> command deltions/archive incompatible changes are in limbo right now. If
> furth comes along "soon", then send those to Tom. If furth takes "a long
> time", then I'll open up a 1.3 development window, and we'll lump all of
> those patches together, and do a 1.3rc1.
I appreciate your conservatism in such matters.
The voting system would be a win here. Really, there should be a list
of "topics" and if a proposed change here overlaps with one of those
topics (e.g., an archive format change) then it should get a "Flag"
vote which blocks it from integration without
more-serious-than-average review.
-t
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] gnuarch 1.2.1 released! (reannouncement), (continued)
- [Gnu-arch-users] gnuarch 1.2.1 released! (reannouncement), James Blackwell, 2004/08/15
- [Gnu-arch-users] Re: gnuarch 1.2.1 released! (reannouncement), Miles Bader, 2004/08/15
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: gnuarch 1.2.1 released! (reannouncement), Aaron Bentley, 2004/08/15
- [Gnu-arch-users] Re: gnuarch 1.2.1 released! (reannouncement), Miles Bader, 2004/08/15
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: gnuarch 1.2.1 released! (reannouncement), Aaron Bentley, 2004/08/15
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: gnuarch 1.2.1 released! (reannouncement), James Blackwell, 2004/08/16
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: gnuarch 1.2.1 released! (reannouncement), Tom Lord, 2004/08/16
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: gnuarch 1.2.1 released! (reannouncement), James Blackwell, 2004/08/16
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: gnuarch 1.2.1 released! (reannouncement),
Tom Lord <=
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: gnuarch 1.2.1 released! (reannouncement), James Blackwell, 2004/08/17
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: gnuarch 1.2.1 released! (reannouncement), Tom Lord, 2004/08/17
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: gnuarch 1.2.1 released! (reannouncement), Andrew Suffield, 2004/08/17
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: gnuarch 1.2.1 released! (reannouncement), Andrew Suffield, 2004/08/17
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: gnuarch 1.2.1 released! (reannouncement), Tom Lord, 2004/08/17
- [Gnu-arch-users] Re: gnuarch 1.2.1 released! (reannouncement), Miles Bader, 2004/08/16
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: gnuarch 1.2.1 released! (reannouncement), Tom Lord, 2004/08/16
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: gnuarch 1.2.1 released! (reannouncement), Tom Lord, 2004/08/16
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: gnuarch 1.2.1 released! (reannouncement), Marc Recht, 2004/08/16
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: gnuarch 1.2.1 released! (reannouncement), Tom Lord, 2004/08/16