On Oct 2, 2014, at 12:33 AM, Satish Balay <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Thu, 2 Oct 2014, Satish Balay wrote: > >> On Thu, 2 Oct 2014, Jed Brown wrote: >> >>> Satish Balay <[email protected]> writes: >>>>> Ok, if this can be documented and made as simple as possible? A >>>>> tool to do it? If it requires remember several arcane git commands >>>>> to do and remember the numbers of 5 merges you made, then forget >>>>> it. >>>> >>>> Perhaps Jed will reply with a simpler 'single' command to do the >>>> revert all the merges from the feature branch - and an easy way to >>>> verify. >>> >>> Nope, but I don't recommend these reverts because it makes it more >>> confusing to follow 'next' and to find which commit introduced a change >>> (when debugging something in 'next'). My preference is that in normal >>> workflow, you don't rebase/modify that which has been merged to 'next'. >>> If it's catastrophically wrong, then revert on 'next' and start over, >>> but if it just needs a tweak, do that on top of your branch. >> >> I think is ok to be a bit more messy in next. Sure there is a tradeoff >> - but you get better debugging in master :) >> >> We shouldn't be doing rebase for every feature branch (thats merged to >> next) - but for the very few that might need it - we should ok to do >> it. >> >> And it should be done only when the feature is deemed *complete* [say >> 1-2 weeks of cooking in next - without a need for updates] > > I guess another alternative for these veryfew feature branches > that need to iterate over nightlytest suites is: > > - never merge feature branch to next untile its complete This is silly. I lose all the portability testing that next provides and would never be able to merge into next because I know things will be broken. Yupp definitely something wrong with our current model. Seems to me we should just restart next from master every few days. > - switch master or next nightlytest to feature branch [for a few days] > - fix rebase feature branch as needed. > > [would perhaps require test infrastructure improvements - and an > apriori knowledge that this feature branch could go through major back > and forth changes requiring multiple rebases] > > Satish
