On 16/07/2012 03:11, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
On 7/15/12 7:44 PM, Adam Wilson wrote:
I should note that we use this exact model for every project we have
where I work and that it is been highly successful at keeping those five
points of tension moderated. And our users can actually get work done
without waiting for weeks and months because thing X is just plain
broken, which in turn makes us look good. (Improving Loyalty)
Allow me to propose something.
Right now all dmd changes get merged in the head. Suppose we find a
volunteer in the community who is:
1. Highly motivated
2. With a good understanding of D
3. Expert with git
4. Reliable
I wonder if it's possible that that person cherry-picks commits from
HEAD into two separate branches: bugfixes and unstable. It should be
easy to create installers etc. for those.
If we see this works well and gathers steady interest, we can improve it
and make it the practice of the entire team.
Would this be possible?
Andrei
What would be the difference betwwen dmd head and unstable ?
Isn't it more simple to merge in unstable only or both unstable and
bugfix at first ?
