-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 According to Joel E. Denny on 4/10/2009 6:57 AM: > Thanks for taking the time to do this. I get the concept now, and I may > like to try it in the future. However... > > I don't like the effect this has on git log for our current branches. > Too many commits show up duplicated, and some log entries don't make sense > for master.
Understood. Which is why I only did it on my copy (it's nice that you can throw away a failed experiment with a DVCS; demo-ing this branching strategy would have been much harder under CVS). > > Once branch-2.4.2 and branch-2.5 become inactive, we'll have a fresh start > at this approach, and maybe we can get it right then. Agreed. In fact, that's the same approach that Ralf Wildenhues took with automake - waiting until a formal release as the moment to switch to a better branching strategy. > > In the meantime, would you push your patch separately to each of those > branches? I can do it if you're busy. I've just done it for the testsuite patch. Did you want me to also update the autoconf submodule on branch-2.5 and master? - -- Don't work too hard, make some time for fun as well! Eric Blake [email protected] -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (Cygwin) Comment: Public key at home.comcast.net/~ericblake/eblake.gpg Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iEYEARECAAYFAknfRtMACgkQ84KuGfSFAYA+RwCeKUVIBDBcASqBtYxHkVHnRHoF JqoAn0H7aBNXNH0DoAiKq2iq4uyLkzPw =9Rg7 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
