Le jeudi 03 février 2011 à 22:04 +1000, Nick Coghlan a écrit : > 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).
I share the concern that it will make things harder for contributors (right now they only have to care about the feature branch). Also, the fact that we have several bugfix branches (2.x, 3.x, not counting security-only branches) makes the whole thing much fuzzier. Regards Antoine. _______________________________________________ python-committers mailing list python-committers@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-committers
