> > Though I've been quiet on this thread I've been following it with > > interest. > > Too bad, your comments are always insightful, and you might have some > clever idea to fix the aforementioned issue. >
I'd love to have some clever ideas, but at present I've mostly got to-do list items. :( > > I have two favors to ask: > > > > * Since we appear agreed the previous patch is a Good Thing, even if > > it's not the ultimate solution to everything, could you put it in a > > branch, add it to the ticket, and mark it "Ready for Testing" > > The branch is currently against 0.25.x, should I create a new one > against master and/or testing? > > In general against master, though 0.25.x is probably fine for this. > More generally, if, say, I want to produce a new patch for Rowlf (I'm > thinking about some random puppetdoc fix or feature), what is the more > convenient for you: > * base it on top of the latest available testing (or somewhere in the > middle) > * base it on master > Against master unless I say otherwise; if ask you to base it against testing then shoot me and do it against anyway master. We've played around with various ways of basing things mid-testing but with an ephemeral branch it seems to bring nothing but grief. The closest thing that works is, if there is a topic branch that needs a fix, to base the fix off the topic branch, but even that is problematic. -- Markus -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Puppet Developers" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-dev?hl=en.
