From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: "Stephen J. Turnbull" Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Git transition workflow Date: Tue, 12 Aug 2014 11:28:17 +0900 Message-ID: <87r40migqm.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> References: NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1407810534 6236 80.91.229.3 (12 Aug 2014 02:28:54 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 12 Aug 2014 02:28:54 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Paul Michael Reilly Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue Aug 12 04:28:45 2014 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1XH1pM-0000KF-1g for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 12 Aug 2014 04:28:44 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:38807 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XH1pL-0002hJ-IX for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 11 Aug 2014 22:28:43 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:40462) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XH1pB-0002h1-1r for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 11 Aug 2014 22:28:40 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XH1p3-0006sq-II for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 11 Aug 2014 22:28:32 -0400 Original-Received: from mgmt2.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp ([130.158.97.224]:49474) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XH1p3-0006s4-8V for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 11 Aug 2014 22:28:25 -0400 Original-Received: from uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp (uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp [130.158.99.156]) by mgmt2.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7F6D4970B45; Tue, 12 Aug 2014 11:28:17 +0900 (JST) Original-Received: by uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 6FD621A2834; Tue, 12 Aug 2014 11:28:17 +0900 (JST) In-Reply-To: X-Mailer: VM undefined under 21.5 (beta34) "kale" acf1c26e3019 XEmacs Lucid (x86_64-unknown-linux) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6.x X-Received-From: 130.158.97.224 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:173582 Archived-At: Paul Michael Reilly writes: > Am I wrong, and it is intuitively obvious how we are going to deal > with git and branches, rebasing, reviews, etc? Having observed several of these transitions, including Emacs's CVS->Bazaar transition, it's really not a problem as long as the git fans accept that several major contributors just want a CVS-like workflow, and git commands that implement that workflow are explained in straightforward terms. Based on bzr experience, Emacs is not going to change its basic focus of on-trunk development with release branches (and there's no need to do so at present). The people who might actually want to rebase already know why it can be dangerous, and how to do it safely. The review process isn't going to change (and there's no pressing need to do so, and several potential minuses to making it more stringent -- cf the famous play, "Death of a Version Control System", whose protagonists were really big on formal process).