On Wednesday, August 8, 2012, Alex Harui wrote: > > > > On 8/8/12 12:33 AM, "Bertrand Delacretaz" > <bdelacre...@apache.org<javascript:;>> > wrote: > > > On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 9:27 AM, Justin Mclean > > <jus...@classsoftware.com<javascript:;> > > > > wrote: > > Alex wrote: > >>> Let's use the unstable branch until we prove we don't need it. > > > >> You want to work that way go ahead I will not be using it. > > > > This is a typical case were consensus is hard to reach - I suggest > > exposing both options as concisely as possible and starting a new > > [POLL] thread where other committers can express their preferences. > > > > -Bertrand > OK, I will start a POLL. But what good will it do if others refuse to > abide > by it? I can't veto his commit on technical basis, he just has a different > approach he wants to use. Basically those who don't want to use an interim > branch can simply make it not work for everyone else. > > -- > Alex Harui > Flex SDK Team > Adobe Systems, Inc. > http://blogs.adobe.com/aharui
I agree with Alex. It's no use to come up with an approach if some people are going to run against the grain anyhow and do things their way. I think using a single trunk is a mistake. Like Alex said, yes there are 10000 Mustella tests, obviously it's not enough with over 30000 defects in JIRA. I would vote for separate branches. I'd go as far as making integration branches for each patch submitted to run tests against that patch and make sure nothing is broken that shouldn't be. Either way, everyone has to buy in to whatever the consensus is, or it's going to be a clusterfuck. -omar
