On 03/25/2010 08:43 PM, David ‘Bombe’ Roden wrote: > Also I think that your notion of “a shared branch that a lot of people can > commit to” is slightly flawed. Everybody commits into their own repository. > There _is_ no “shared branch.”
My point is that there should be (and the only way to do that is to have a shared repository, because only repositories grant access). It's tedious to create a new branch just to do a one-off bug fix, and tedious to one-commit pulls from 5 separate branches. > I’m not arguing against a staging branch, I’m arguing against a staging > repository. So what do you mean by a staging branch? A branch that needs a core dev to pull into, but which doesn't need to be reviewed? What's the point of that? Why not just pull only when you've reviewed it? X _______________________________________________ Devl mailing list [email protected] http://osprey.vm.bytemark.co.uk/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl
