Jeff King <> writes:

> On Fri, Nov 09, 2012 at 12:27:35PM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>> What we should have arranged was to have
>> (which is not even owned by me, but I asked somebody at GitHub to
>> assign me a write privilege) writable by the interim maintainer, so
>> that normal people would keep pulling from there, while the interim
>> maintainer can choose to publish broken-out branches to his
>> repository.
> Yes, I have write access to that repository, too, but I intentionally
> held off from updating it out of a sense of nervousness. I figured if I
> screwed up anything too badly, people who were clued-in enough to switch
> to pulling from my repository would be clued-in enough to rebase across
> any too-horrible mistake I made. ;)

That "nervousness" reminds me of myself when I took over.  Before I
could ask for a few weeks of practice period, Linus arranged to have
folks at to chown the authoritative location to me, declaring
"no practice period; it's already done and it's all yours".

And I made at least one mistake pushing 'master' with one commit
rewound too much (corrected by pushing an extra merge).  Luckily,
the world did not end ;-).

> I think if we do this again, I will make the same split you do (git/git
> for integration branches, peff/git as a mirror of my private repo).

I am fairly sure I'll have to ask you (or somebody else) again next
year around late September.

>> And it is not too late to do so; from the look of your "What's
>> cooking", you are doing pretty well ;-).
> Any fool can merge topics to master. The real test will be how many
> regressions people report in the next two weeks. :)

I agree that the actual merging to 'master' is mechanical with the
procedure built around Meta/Reintegrate.  Important decisions are
made before you merge a topic to 'next' and mark topics as "Will
merge to 'master'."  My comment was about that, and your responses
to the list messages.

> By the way, I did not touch 'maint' at all while you were gone. I don't
> know what your usual method is for keeping track of maint-worthy topics
> after they have gone to master. The usual "what's cooking" workflow
> keeps track of things going to master, but no more; I'd guess you
> probably just merge to maint when you delete them from last cycle's
> "graduated to master" list.

That is done by eyeballing output from Meta/GRADUATED (which spits
out something that could be fed to shell, but I do not fully trust
its logic, and always eyeball them before I prepare the temporary
file to feed Meta/Reintegrate to update 'maint').
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at

Reply via email to