On Wed, Feb 2, 2011 at 7:22 PM, Michael Foord <mfo...@python.org> wrote: > On 02/02/2011 23:35, Steve Holden wrote: >> >> On Feb 2, 2011, at 6:29 PM, Nick Coghlan wrote: >> >>> On Thu, Feb 3, 2011 at 9:16 AM, Barry Warsaw<ba...@python.org> wrote: >>>> >>>> On Feb 03, 2011, at 08:54 AM, Nick Coghlan wrote: >>>> >>>>> I suspect this problem with the preferred DVCS workflow is going to >>>>> cut fairly heavily into the number of bug fixes applied to the >>>>> maintenance branches. >>>> >>>> I'd be really surprised if it *has* to be that way. Just how painful is >>>> it in >>>> Mercurial to apply to newest branch first and back port? >>> >>> I have no idea. I just know that the first response from veteran hg >>> users when asked how to implement our current workflow in Mercurial is >>> "don't do that" (followed by reluctant explanations of tools you might >>> use to do it, if you insisted on doing things "the wrong way"). >>> >> Call me unadventurous, but i'd quite like to see how we get on ding things >> the *right* way first. >>
Call me naive, but isn't the planned hg workflow described in the PEP? http://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0385/#proposed-workflow No, I have not read it. :-) _______________________________________________ python-committers mailing list python-committers@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-committers
