On Mon, Oct 11, 2010 at 10:01 PM, Jameson Rollins
<jrollins at finestructure.net> wrote:
> On Mon, 11 Oct 2010 21:45:47 +0300, Felipe Contreras <felipe.contreras at 
> gmail.com> wrote:
>> I think many people agree notmuch mainline has been rather slow. So
>> I'm proposing to have notmuch-next branch, either on github or
>> gitorious (please vote).
>> More than one person should have write access to this repo, but some
>> guidelines should be in place. I propose that patches should be
>> signed-off-by at least another person in the mailing list before
>> pushing. It would be nice if this is how the mainline branch works,
>> but we don't need to wait for that to happen. We need to vote on who
>> are the people to have write access.
> I think this generally sounds like a fine idea, but I don't see why we
> need a single central repo that multiple people need access to. ?The
> whole point of git is to allow for distributed development without need
> for a central repo.

And yet, git is hosted in a central repo. Different projects have
different needs, and this one seems to need a place to cook up
patches, having multiple committers there seems like it would work.
Note that this wouldn't be the main repo, it would be preparing stage.

> In this case, folks can just merge the patches they're interested in
> into a "next" branch in their own personal repos, publish them where
> ever they want, and then every body can just keep their "next" branches
> synced with each other. ?As consensus is reached, the next release will
> emerge.

That might also work, it would be the first project I see doing that
though. But what I worry is the ordering of the patches; we might have
applied the same patches, but they would appear as totally different
branches to a 3rd party, and of course merging other people's 'next'
branches would create a total mess. There should be one repo that has
the latest and greatest 'next' branch that everybody can rebase into,
like the current 'master'.

Felipe Contreras

Reply via email to