On Thu, Jun 2, 2011 at 10:22 PM, Tim Starling <[email protected]> wrote: > No, I think extension updates can be backported more regularly, as > long as the changes are tested, and the potential impact is limited.
What about core updates that are tested and have limited potential impact? Like, say, most of the updates we'd get to core in any given week? There isn't much of a hard distinction between core and extensions. > Core changes are typically complex and interdependent, and can cause > problems for extensions. Large projects are committed to core in a > low-quality state, and it takes time to stabilise them, despite the > efforts of development branch reviewers. That's why major core updates > require more testing. This would argue equally well for not committing large projects to trunk all at once, or only committing them hidden behind off-by-default preferences. It doesn't mean you can't regularly deploy the simple changes that are unlikely to cause significant problems, and where the problems can be easily fixed when they're found. _______________________________________________ Wikitech-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
