November 28, 2006


(11:48:05) James: I think you've missed the point
(11:48:39) Oxygenik: I think you don't agree that urgent fixes should happen first
(11:49:01) Oxygenik: because once you agree with that then it follows that release-tag should be fixed first
(11:49:02) Sarah: I think we've lost DNS or something, general net access here just turned iffy
(11:52:29) James: I'm trying to say that rel -> trunk leaves us room to forget. We *know* it's an important step, but because we can do it at our leisure, we may forget. We don't *want* to forget, but circumstances overtake us sometimes. trunk -> rel prevents that, because the pressure is never off until rel is fixed and released. The port process is *usually* trivially, so it doesn't take up a significant amount of extra time. rel->trunk might be considered better because the fix gets out there slightly faster, but it's no good if the fixer forgets to merge it back to trunk, we release trunk a while later, and exactly the same bug turns up.
Posted by Oxygenik at November 28, 2006 2:05 PM

Why not open a high-pri bug against release and trunk? That way you won't forget. That's why you have a bug tracking system.

Fix release and apply the exact same patch to trunk at the same time.

Posted by: Tantrix at November 28, 2006 4:52 PM

Because our bug tracking system (which I wrote a lot of, because everything must be invented here) doesn't allow us to target bugs at branches.

Posted by: Oxygenik at November 28, 2006 5:02 PM

Hi VEry nice posts i'sure i'sts nice

Posted by: Helleojagasip at June 16, 2010 6:22 PM

So-so. Something was not impressed.

Posted by: Savannah at September 6, 2011 9:52 PM

Wow! I could not even guess about it)) Not bad.

Posted by: William at January 25, 2013 4:56 PM


Posted by: at August 9, 2015 7:57 AM
Post a comment

Remember personal info?