On Wed, May 26, 2010 at 9:49 PM, Jarrod Millman <[email protected]>wrote:
> On Wed, May 26, 2010 at 8:08 PM, Matthew Brett <[email protected]> > wrote: > > That's the model we've gone for in nipy and ipython too. We wrote it > > up in a workflow doc project. Here are the example docs giving the > > git workflow for ipython: > > > > https://cirl.berkeley.edu/mb312/gitwash/ > > > > and in particular: > > > > https://cirl.berkeley.edu/mb312/gitwash/development_workflow.html > > I would highly recommend using this workflow. Ideally, we should use > the same git workflow for all the scipy-related projects. That way > developers can switch between projects without having to switch > workflows. The model that Matthew and Fernando developed for nipy and > ipython seem like a very reasonable place to start. > __ > I wouldn't. Who is going to be the gate keeper and pull the stuff? No vacations for him/her, on 24 hour call, yes? They might as well run a dairy. And do we really want all pull requests cross-posted to the list? Linus works full time as gatekeeper for Linux and gets paid for the effort. I think a central repository model would work better for us. Chuck
_______________________________________________ NumPy-Discussion mailing list [email protected] http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
