2010/10/18 MZMcBride <[email protected]>: > Waiting for more revisions to build up makes diagnosing and finding problems > more difficult (same size needle, larger haystack). Are you suggesting we deploy a revision that's somewhere halfway between the currently deployed revision and HEAD? I'm leery of that because we don't really know what the stability of that revision is. It'll likely also have issues that got fixed later, but that may be hard to merge in because of the large difference (hence more potential for merge conflicts) between the new deployment and HEAD. This is why I would like to deploy code that's as close to HEAD as possible, and to *stay* close to HEAD by doing regular deployments.
> You know this and I know > this, which is why I'm trying to pivot the conversation toward what I view > as the bigger question: who's going to be doing general code updates in the > future? I would personally feel comfortable to do a small-sized general update (say, a week's worth of code as opposed to the gigantic update needed to catch up with trunk) if there's a few other people around ready to jump in and help me if something goes wrong. For a large update with many potential complications, I do think Tim should be involved. Roan Kattouw (Catrope) _______________________________________________ Wikitech-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
