Graham Percival <[email protected]> writes: > On Tue, Jun 05, 2012 at 10:11:46AM +0200, John Mandereau wrote: >> Now that I have looked at the scripts for building staging and merging >> it into master, upgraded my Fedora installation, a cron job runs this >> every two hours on my computer in the lab, and sends an email >> notification only if something fails or when a build is done. How about >> adding merging with translation? I propose that when staging builds >> succesfully, it should be merged into master and translation, then a >> build of translation is attempted, and if it succeeds translation is >> merged into master. > > Subsequent discussion nixed the ideal of auto-merging back into > master, but would it make sense to auto-merge master into > translation?
Depends on what kind of workflow the translators want. The direction of the merge makes no difference with regard to the probability of reaching a state that may no longer compile even without a previous warning through merge conflicts. But then both git-visible or git-sidestepping merge conflicts need to be resolved eventually. If multiple translators are working simultaneously on the translations branch, it might be a reasonable expectation that the translation branch would not become uncompilable by automatic means, namely at unexpected and possibly inconvenient times. -- David Kastrup _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
