-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Robert Collins wrote: > On Thu, 2008-03-27 at 22:03 -0400, Tres Seaver wrote: >> >> I thought I understood that 'bzr' encouraged the "fix on the old rev >> and >> forward port" model over "backporting / cherry picking"? In the style >> described at: >> >> http://www.venge.net/mtn-wiki/DaggyFixes > > I think that daggyfixes is the tail shaking the dog. > > Folk usually don't know how far back a problem goes when they realise a > problem exists; where the fix exists in the global revision dag is a > technical issue for vcs authors, it should not be something code authors > need to think about.
OK. I had the impression that bzr's model was "branch happy" (compared to CVS / SVN), which would seem to me to make "forward porting" more attractive. For instance, in supportig Zope2, we often need to do a fix across multiple supported releases: e.g., if somebody reported a security issue today, we might end up releasing fixes for Zope 2.8 and 2.9, as well as 2.10 (the currently released branch) and 2.11 (the almost-ready-for-prime-time branch). I've even done one fix in this configuration for 2.7 (because there are a large number of production systems on 2.7, including a couple of my clients). My experience with such fixes indicates that it is much easier to fix the oldest stuff, and than forward port, compared to fixing the trunk, and then backporting. That made the "daggy fixes" model seem quite natural to me. Tres. - -- =================================================================== Tres Seaver +1 540-429-0999 [EMAIL PROTECTED] Palladion Software "Excellence by Design" http://palladion.com -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFH7FdB+gerLs4ltQ4RAkmhAKCm+rGNEcIicIebAaxNnfj++c4uRwCgscMD 3ny2d8pBxxPrFWmXKm3Z+H8= =maXL -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
