On Thu, Feb 3, 2011 at 10:37 AM, Jesus Cea <j...@jcea.es> wrote: > In fact, "up-porting" is usually better, because you don't have to think > if you must downport or not. Versión "n+1" is always a superset of > versión "n". So you "up-port" *ALWAYS*, automatically (mostly) via merge.
As I said, I'm happy to roll with the proposed workflow as documented in the PEP, based on the advice from experts that Mercurial doesn't really suit our current work flow. I'm just noting that I expect the result will be fewer fixes in maintenance branches, since it is harder to divide the tasks of implementing a fix for the main line of development and applying that fix to the maintenance branches (unlike the way it often happens now). The worse possibility is that fixes may be applied to maintenance branches and not to the main line of development, leading to regressions after upgrades (since the associated tests wouldn't be forward ported either). Cheers, Nick. -- Nick Coghlan | ncogh...@gmail.com | Brisbane, Australia _______________________________________________ python-committers mailing list python-committers@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-committers
