I second these experiences of working off m-i. Pushing patches manually is 
randomly frustrating, and so I've been using the "checkin-needed" keyword to 
avoid dealing with tree closures.

The only problem with our own JS branch is that we need to periodically merge 
from m-c to JS. In the case of IonMonkey, this was taking dvander a significant 
amount of time on a near-daily basis, and we were eager to land just so we 
could stop dealing with merge conflicts.

We could perhaps cycle through merge responsibility to avoid overtaxing any one 
individual.

Sean

----- Original Message -----
From: "Brian Hackett" <[email protected]>
To: "JS Internals list" <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, December 12, 2013 12:08:15 PM
Subject: [JS-internals] Reviving a JS specific tree

I think mozilla-inbound is a failed experiment.  It seems like at
least half the time I try to land a patch, the tree is closed, usually
because of some issue unrelated to JS.  When the tree reopens I need
to rush to get patches in before it recloses, which increases the risk
that patches cause failures, need backouts, or cause closures,
screwing things up for other developers.  I find this process to be
very stressful and a huge waste of time, and it is steadily sapping
the enjoyment I get out of working on this browser.  There are just
too many developers competing to push patches to this tree.

I think we should move back to a model where there is a separate tree
where JS patches land, which is periodically merged to
mozilla-central.  JS patches tend to not conflict with patches in
other parts of the tree so this merging should be straightforward.
The only tree closures should be because of bustage in JS and
infrastructure issues.

Brian
_______________________________________________
dev-tech-js-engine-internals mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-tech-js-engine-internals
_______________________________________________
dev-tech-js-engine-internals mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-tech-js-engine-internals

Reply via email to