> > Committing to a different branch / fork would make current > > divergence get larger making it harder to ever get back to > > being a single project. > > I don't use bazaar much at all, but I assume that one can merge code > from different remotes, like in Git. So what about giving each > developer their own repo and then aggressively merging code, just as > long as it doesn't break anything? > > That way, even if some changes don't initially get merged-in, they > wouldn't be completely lost. They'd still be there, ready to be > re-worked and re-submitted for inclusion.
This would work fine, but it relies on discipline as to what's merged into trunk. The lack of discipline in committing things to trunk is exactly the problem (the reason why trunk's testsuite now fails), so using merges instead doesn't really address the issue. bwy -- Free Flash, use Gnash http://www.gnu.org/software/gnash/ Benjamin Wolsey, Software Developer - http://benjaminwolsey.de C++ and Open-Source Flash blog - http://www.benjaminwolsey.de/bwysblog xmpp:b...@xabber.de http://identi.ca/bwy
signature.asc
Description: Dies ist ein digital signierter Nachrichtenteil
_______________________________________________ Gnash-dev mailing list Gnash-dev@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnash-dev
