Re: GOP-PROP 12: keep master in ready-to-release state (probable decision)

[Trevor Daniels]

Graham Percival

> Developers doing medium-large fixes: examples include beam
> collisions, music function rewriting, Flag grobs, etc. All this
> work should go on separate branches (e.g. dev/flag-grob,
> dev/scheme-music-functions). Once the code is merged, the branch
> should be removed. People can still use dev/myname instead, but I
> think that naming these branches after the feature (or bugfix)
> will be more clear.

How would this code be reviewed?  Do you envisage still
uploading to Reitfeld?  Would this be before pushing to
dev/* or after?  I still think this is a complication too far.
Certainly it needs more thought and comment from the 'big'
developers before being adopted.

My preference is for a single staging branch.  Major patches
would be pushed there rather than to master after a successful 
Reitfeld review, and only cherry-picked to master after successful 
tests (eg doc build) by someone authorised to do so.

Trevor



-----
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 10.0.1410 / Virus Database: 1520/3913 - Release Date: 09/22/11