On Tue, Jul 19, 2011 at 2:29 PM, Bernt Hansen wrote:
> With Suvayu's model you would only merge for the release and that means
> the new master won't have the same level of testing exposure before a
> release is created. We don't have full coverage of org-mode's features
> in the ERT testing fram
Bastien writes:
> Hi Suvayu,
>
> thanks for sharing this suggestion and to make it so clear.
>
> I understand the model you describe and I see why it's appropriate for
> projects like "git" -- as IIUC, your proposal is very close to the one
> described by git's maintainer.
>
> - The latest git H
Hi Bastien,
On Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 6:50 PM, Bastien wrote:
> This additional work is only worth undertaking when people are
> *really* using the branches to collaborate -- which is quite unlikely to
> happen given the three reasons above
I failed to consider the above bit of information when I
Hi Suvayu,
thanks for sharing this suggestion and to make it so clear.
I understand the model you describe and I see why it's appropriate for
projects like "git" -- as IIUC, your proposal is very close to the one
described by git's maintainer.
Let me summarize my ideas about how we should use gi
Hi Bastien,
On Sat, 09 Jul 2011 10:44:45 +0200
Bastien wrote:
> > http://www.kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/howto/maintain-git.txt
>
> Nice read, thanks.
>
> I guess the relevance of such a development model mainly depends on
> how many developers are trying to collaborate, and at what
Hi Achim,
Achim Gratz writes:
> Pure fixes should probably be applied on top of maint and then merged
> into master (not cherry-picked from master to maint, this would create
> duplicate history). On occasion this might produce a merge conflict,
> but these instances should be rare.
>
> That wa
Hi Suvayu,
Suvayu Ali writes:
> Maybe the development model followed by git itself would be a good
> solution (merges instead of cherry-picking)? Although I fear org is a
> much smaller project compared to git and it could be an overkill.
>
> http://www.kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/howto
Bastien writes:
>> is there a process for bug-fix commits like this one which should be
>> pushed through to Emacs24? I'm thinking a branch (maintenance?) to
>> which this should be pushed or a special way to tag the commit?
>
> there is none for now -- I need to think about it.
Pure fixes shoul
Hi Bastien,
On Fri, 08 Jul 2011 11:08:07 +0200
Bastien wrote:
> As long that I'm confident many testers use the latest master branch,
> I'm reluctant to go through the hassle of cherry-picking commits...
> and just release a minor release with all latest dev from master.
>
> Call me lazy, bu
Hi Nick,
Nick Dokos writes:
> I'm not sure whether I posted this before but if you haven't seen
> it before, it's probably worth reading:
>
>http://nvie.com/posts/a-successful-git-branching-model/
Nice read -- thanks.
In fact, we *do* have a documented process for important fixes
that nee
Hi
>>> I first had to load dot support (because you are calling
>>> org-babel-expand-body:dot). If you want to also attract musicians (without
>Thanks for finding this error Torsten! I've just pushed up a fix.
Thanks Torsten for the heads-up, and
thanks Eric for the rapid response.
Regards
Bastien wrote:
> > is there a process for bug-fix commits like this one which should be
> > pushed through to Emacs24? I'm thinking a branch (maintenance?) to
> > which this should be pushed or a special way to tag the commit?
>
> there is none for now -- I need to think about it.
>
> As I wil
Hi Eric,
Eric Schulte writes:
> Thanks for finding this error Torsten! I've just pushed up a fix.
Thanks.
> Bastien,
>
> is there a process for bug-fix commits like this one which should be
> pushed through to Emacs24? I'm thinking a branch (maintenance?) to
> which this should be pushed or
Bastien writes:
> Hi Torsten,
>
> Torsten Anders writes:
>
>> Some brief comments. Support for additional languages like Lilypond and
>> also awk should be celebrated by including them in the list of languages in
>> the documentation (http://orgmode.org/org.html#Languages).
>
> Fixed in latest o
Hi Torsten,
Torsten Anders writes:
> Some brief comments. Support for additional languages like Lilypond and
> also awk should be celebrated by including them in the list of languages in
> the documentation (http://orgmode.org/org.html#Languages).
Fixed in latest org.texi -- thanks!
> I first
Dear Martyn Jago,
Congratulations to the Lilypond support included in the new Org version 7.6!
For someone who uses both Org-mode and Lilypond anyway (like me :), this is
great to have!
Some brief comments. Support for additional languages like Lilypond and also
awk should be celebrated by in
16 matches
Mail list logo
