On 2023-01-08 10:38, Jeff Epler wrote:
[Chris requested that I explicitly respond to each part of his message.
I will do so even though I have little that is constructive to add]
Thank you, the discussion is important for everyone I think.
These things seem like radical responses to an uncomon mistake.
This will be only be the second time in about 15 years something like this
happened.
You're right, in that I would like to use this as an opportunity to move
the project in a direction I think is good. The term "radical" is
charged, of course. From my point of view, I'm promoting styles of
working that are what I do everyday and which I perceive as working
well.
The word radical was not intended to be charged, feel free to use 'rash'
I was asking questions and giving my opinion.
We can't move forward without discussion - I am interested in your and
others point of view.
If you want to talk merge strategies see my other maillist talk.
The jest of is - why merge released branches into master at all.
As my colleague said, the idea to end the project's long-standing policy
of merging from stable to main seems like a "radical [response] to an
uncomon mistake."
Yes It is radical change to current norms but not without precedence.
IIRC with cvs , we did not merge branch upto branch, only feature branch
to branch.
Also my suggestion was before the problem occurred - so not a radical
_response_ :)
Chris
_______________________________________________
Emc-developers mailing list
Emc-developers@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-developers
