On Thu, 2016-03-17 at 21:28 +0000, Kinney, Michael D wrote: > Yes. Use of developer github forks is supported. I had summarized > 3 development methods earlier in this thread. > > 1) PR emails send to edk2-devel. There is a Wiki page that details process > for developers and maintainer. > > 2) Branch on developer owned github fork of edk2. There have been > discussions on > how to support a pull request. This is still under investigation.
I'm glad to see this. Note that the 'backporting' into Subversion (as Jordan mentioned) shouldn't be an issue; you can always *choose* a linear path through the DAG of commits, so a merge such as A → B → C → D ↘ ↘ B' → C' → E ...can *either* be represented as A → B → C → D → E in Subversion, or perhaps as A → B' → C' → E depending on which side was actually *seen* in the EDK2 repository in the interim. But it certainly shouldn't be a blocker for allowing merge commits, and I can't think of anything *else* that would be. > 3) Branch on edk2-staging (Specific process being discussed in this thread) > > In order to properly capture your feedback, I think a higher level overview > Wiki page on the development methods available needs to be written up with > edk2-staging just being one of the 3 methods (and likely most rare). > > I will work with Tony to get Wiki pages updated with all this information. > > Will this address your concerns? It still hasn't really answered the question of why we need a whole new tree, process and associated documentation for this third and 'most rare' method of merging contributions, when the two existing standard methods should happily cover all use cases. It just seems entirely gratuitous. -- dwmw2
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
_______________________________________________ edk2-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.01.org/mailman/listinfo/edk2-devel
