On Fri, Mar 23, 2012 at 10:13 AM, Chad <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 23, 2012 at 1:11 PM, Rob Lanphier <[email protected]> wrote:
>> On Fri, Mar 23, 2012 at 10:03 AM, Chad <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> I disagree here. The wmf branches should always be linear, and you
>>> should never merge to it without accepting that it may get scapped.
>>
>> Actually, you should never merge to master without accepting that it
>> may get scapped.  Why have two layers here?
>>
>
> Well true, but I still don't see an instance where you'd merge
> to master but *not* be willing to have it deployed.

Chad and I discussed this, and I think we figure out where we were
talking past each other.  I'll let him explain in more detail when he
gets a chance, but the short answer is we'll probably be doing
something roughly like I described as the second plan in my original
email, with the addition of liberal use of tagging.  We could even
*try* to get away with tagging instead of branching, and then only
branch when necessary.

Rob

_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l

Reply via email to