From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Ted Zlatanov Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: ELPA update Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2011 10:08:26 -0500 Organization: =?utf-8?B?0KLQtdC+0LTQvtGAINCX0LvQsNGC0LDQvdC+0LI=?= @ Cienfuegos Message-ID: <87d3ejidxx.fsf@lifelogs.com> References: <87y5xavz8i.fsf@keller.adm.naquadah.org> <87fwji2d8o.fsf@stupidchicken.com> <87ehz1ds54.fsf@keller.adm.naquadah.org> <87wrcsrczf.fsf@lifelogs.com> <878vp8ahsr.fsf@keller.adm.naquadah.org> <87y5x8poj5.fsf@lifelogs.com> <87k48s60fn.fsf@keller.adm.naquadah.org> <87pqikgnc5.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> <8739ffn3dl.fsf@lifelogs.com> <87vcsbwt8h.fsf@keller.adm.naquadah.org> <87wrcrjzjp.fsf@lifelogs.com> <87pqijwid8.fsf@keller.adm.naquadah.org> Reply-To: emacs-devel@gnu.org NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1317308944 23664 80.91.229.12 (29 Sep 2011 15:09:04 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2011 15:09:04 +0000 (UTC) To: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Thu Sep 29 17:09:01 2011 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([140.186.70.17]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1R9IEN-0007wW-AG for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 29 Sep 2011 17:08:59 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:41968 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1R9IEM-0003Ec-Cd for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 29 Sep 2011 11:08:58 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.92]:36888) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1R9IEE-0003Ds-NH for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 29 Sep 2011 11:08:56 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1R9IE9-0006CZ-2G for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 29 Sep 2011 11:08:50 -0400 Original-Received: from lo.gmane.org ([80.91.229.12]:53351) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1R9IE8-0006Bo-Ie for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 29 Sep 2011 11:08:45 -0400 Original-Received: from list by lo.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1R9IE6-0007nz-15 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 29 Sep 2011 17:08:42 +0200 Original-Received: from 38.98.147.133 ([38.98.147.133]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Thu, 29 Sep 2011 17:08:42 +0200 Original-Received: from tzz by 38.98.147.133 with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Thu, 29 Sep 2011 17:08:42 +0200 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ Mail-Followup-To: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-Lines: 49 Original-X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: 38.98.147.133 X-Face: bd.DQ~'29fIs`T_%O%C\g%6jW)yi[zuz6; d4V0`@y-~$#3P_Ng{@m+e4o<4P'#(_GJQ%TT= D}[Ep*b!\e,fBZ'j_+#"Ps?s2!4H2-Y"sx" Mail-Copies-To: never User-Agent: Gnus/5.110018 (No Gnus v0.18) Emacs/24.0.90 (gnu/linux) Cancel-Lock: sha1:Ww6ESI05hZ5PeCiF/d1SGMP0sr4= X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 3) X-Received-From: 80.91.229.12 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:144478 Archived-At: On Thu, 29 Sep 2011 16:09:07 +0200 Julien Danjou wrote: JD> On Thu, Sep 29 2011, Ted Zlatanov wrote: >> In Git you can cherry-pick between branches, which makes a new commit ID >> but the patch contents (including the commit message) are the same. So >> that lets you take just one change from one branch to another. It's not >> ideal but it's very easy to use and automate. JD> Let's hope nobody will ever modify more than one file/package in a JD> commit. Or your strategy will begin to be much more complicated. :) So far it hasn't been a problem, most non-maintainer commits cover one thing. >> If that's too complicated or undesirable in Bazaar and there's no other >> way to merge just a few commits from one branch to another, I'm open to >> suggestions. I still feel, no matter the merge mechanism, that we >> should use the VCS branch and not the package version as the deciding >> factor whether to publish a package. JD> I do not disagree, this is actually kind of how the Linux kernel is JD> handled if you look at it that way. Yes, it's a common strategy. It works well. JD> But since there's only 2 branches (stable/dev) I'm just not sure it's JD> the best approach here: JD> - merging parts of -dev branch into a -stable branch is complicated No more than managing 20+ package versions, and you have the benefit that you can publish the branch directly from a cron job. JD> - tagging a branch when it's ready to be publish with so many packages JD> is impossible since developement is happening there on multiple JD> packages at the same time Right, tags are not so good with many moving parts. Cherry-picking is better to select only the "ready" pieces for promotion. JD> At least, the solution to have a set of tags named "{$package}-ready" JD> which would move on commits will assure that each package is put into JD> ELPA at the right stage. You can even rollback by moving the tag. JD> (I'm just not sure bzr can handle that correctly, and that the bzr users JD> would not make mistakes) I'm not sure tags would help as much as separate branches, but certainly it could be beaten into a working state :) Ted