On Sun, Jul 18, 2010 at 10:32 PM, Paul Moore <p.f.mo...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 18 July 2010 20:57, Glyph Lefkowitz <gl...@twistedmatrix.com> wrote: >> >> On Jul 18, 2010, at 1:46 PM, Alexander Belopolsky wrote: >> >> We already have "posponed" and "remind" resolutions, but these are >> exclusive of "accepted". I think there should be a clear way to mark >> the issue "accepted and would be applied if X.Y was out already." >> Chances are one of the resolution labels already has such meaning, but >> in this case it should be more prominently documented as such. >> >> This is what branches are for. >> When the X.Y release cycle starts, there should be a branch for X.Y. Any >> "would be applied" patches can simply be applied to trunk without >> interrupting anything; the X.Y release branch can be merged back into trunk >> as necessary. > > Agreed. If that isn't already the recommended workflow under > Mercurial, I'd suggest making it so. (I can imagine that under > Subversion, where branching and merging is more awkward, it might have > been deemed not worth doing). > > Paul.
Contrary to a widespread popular belief subversion supports branching and I don't think anyone suggested merging release branches back (even though you can do it in subversion as well). Cheers, fijal _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
