C. Michael Pilato wrote:
> On 07/12/2011 09:40 AM, Hyrum K Wright wrote:
> > We should probably consider having Andrew and his group do their work
> > on a branch in our repository.
+1. I can create a branch, called ... well, the basic nature of this
proposal is simplifying the scope of what merging is allowed/supported,
with the aim of simplifying the lives of users who currently sometimes
mess up, yes? So the branch could be called "simpler-merge".
Note that there are other possible ways of working, which can be tried
as well as or instead of the branch. An external script is another good
option, like the way 'svnmerge.py' existed before the current built-in
merge tracking. I was talking to Andy the other day and I got the
strong impression that his focus (and the reason he mentioned an
"extensible" data format and some implementation details such as using a
file rather than a property) was specifically to encourage
experimentation and extension and participation, including by people who
might not normally work in the core C code.
A script has the advantage that it could be tried and even rolled out by
people who are still using 1.6.x.
None of that is a reason not to start a branch.
Received on 2011-07-12 16:53:20 CEST