On Saturday 24 October 2009, Nicolas Pitre wrote:
> On Sat, 24 Oct 2009, David Brownell wrote:
> 
> > > I'm very pleased we have successfully migrated to git
> > > before 0.3.
> > 
> > Yes; though as Nico pointed out, doing some work in
> > branches would be a good thing.  (I'm thinking of
> > checking out "stgit" myself ... )
> 
> I was a quilt user before Git.  These days however I do all my stuff 
> with native Git branches only.  I looked at StGit at some point and came 
> back to native Git.  When you get used to it, you don't want to look 
> back.

Yeah, it doesn't look bad at all.  I am however used
to working with quilt over git.

Now, if I could only find out why nontrivial merges
with git never seem to work right for me.  :(


> > During a bugfix-only RC phase, it'd be natural for
> > folk to have ongoing development in branches.  Then
> > there would be some post-release merges of those
> > branches into the mainline.
> 
> Right.  And to let people have easy access to those branches, my 
> suggestion is for major contributors to publish those branches in the 
> main Git repo on sourceforge.  Suffice to establish a branch namespace 
> such as:
> 
>       oyvind/mcrmrc
>       oyvind/vector_catch
>       david/thumb2
>       zach/install_script
> 
> and so on.  Once a branch is ready then someone simply checks out master 
> and merges that branch:
> 
>       git checkout master
>       git merge foobar/perfect_feature

Or into some staging branch, when multiple branches which
need to cooperate with each other get merged.


> And at that point the branch can be deleted from the main repository.

That implies a slightly different process than has been followed
thus far ... more of a "long term development activity" than a
"bunch of short term patches".

Now, I think that such a change would likely be a Good Thing in
many ways.  Bugfixes are the little things; ditto smallish
features.


> And so on.  Unlike CVS, and even SVN to a certain extent, Branches are 
> extremely easy to work with Git and people should not be afraid of using 
> them at will.
> 
> Eventually, when OpenOCD will become a project as big as the Linux 
> kernel ;-) then major developers could keep separate Git repositories of 
> their own that get pulled in the main repository.  But for now I think 
> the above suggestion should be good enough and simple.

Yes.  Zach suggest repositories on non-SF sites for other
developers; same sort of stuff.

- Dave


_______________________________________________
Openocd-development mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/openocd-development

Reply via email to