On Wed, Jul 15, 2009 at 01:32:50PM -0000, Scott James Remnant wrote:
> On Tue, 2009-07-14 at 21:46 +0000, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
>
> > The fix is in the maint branch, just not in a release.
> >
> I haven't quite figured out your branch scheme yet; master, maint and
> next all seem to have 1.41.8 tags - yet none of them quite match what
> went into the tarball?
>
> Don't suppose you mind giving me a quick primer?
Branches are dynamic; tags are static.
Bug-fixes and tiny enhancements are checked into the maint branch.
Periodically, I make tag and make a commit for a maintenance release
off the maint branch. Periodically changes in the maint branch are
merged into "next". New "big" changes are fed into the "next" branch,
and a few days later, the "master" branch will catch up with the
"next" branch, and then the "next" branch will leapfrog ahead with
some new changes.
The basic idea here is that people who want to surf on the bleeding
edge can follow either "master" or "next", depending on how much on
the edge they want to live. I also have the "pu" proposed update
branch, which is where the really outre' changes live. The "pu"
branch is subject to rebasing/rewinding, so other developers should
not try to base patches on "pu". This is a place where poeple can
test things like the 64-bit support code, which is currently very much
in development.
All of the branches have v1.41.8 tags, because they all have a
superset of the v1.41.8 changes. "Next" and "master" have more than
"maint", though. The gitk program does a pretty good job of showing
the graphical dependency; if you run "gitk master next pu", and then
scroll up and down, hopefully this will make more sense.
Regards,
- Ted
--
e2fsck will corrupt filesystems when replaying journal
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/380727
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
--
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
