From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Stephen Leake Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: More metaproblem Date: Thu, 04 Dec 2014 10:33:21 -0600 Message-ID: <85sigvnzn2.fsf@stephe-leake.org> References: <20141203142859.24393.98673@vcs.savannah.gnu.org> <20141203192721.GE12748@thyrsus.com> <547F6774.50700@cs.ucla.edu> <838uio5vjw.fsf@gnu.org> <20141203211447.GB15111@thyrsus.com> <871toge5zw.fsf@floss.red-bean.com> <83388v6hsq.fsf@gnu.org> <85zjb3q06b.fsf@stephe-leake.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1417710838 1422 80.91.229.3 (4 Dec 2014 16:33:58 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 4 Dec 2014 16:33:58 +0000 (UTC) To: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Thu Dec 04 17:33:50 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 1XwZLh-0004ml-QE for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 04 Dec 2014 17:33:49 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:46589 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XwZLh-0001lV-BM for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 04 Dec 2014 11:33:49 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:35128) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XwZLO-0001lK-EC for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 04 Dec 2014 11:33:36 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XwZLI-0003fZ-Bl for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 04 Dec 2014 11:33:30 -0500 Original-Received: from dnvrco-outbound-snat.email.rr.com ([107.14.73.228]:45530 helo=dnvrco-oedge-vip.email.rr.com) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XwZLI-0003fG-7r for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 04 Dec 2014 11:33:24 -0500 Original-Received: from [70.94.38.149] ([70.94.38.149:49787] helo=TAKVER) by dnvrco-oedge02 (envelope-from ) (ecelerity 3.5.0.35861 r(Momo-dev:tip)) with ESMTP id F2/A4-16151-3DC80845; Thu, 04 Dec 2014 16:33:23 +0000 In-Reply-To: (Stefan Monnier's message of "Thu, 04 Dec 2014 10:35:24 -0500") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.3.94 (windows-nt) X-RR-Connecting-IP: 107.14.64.130:25 X-Authority-Analysis: v=2.1 cv=bePlUY/B c=1 sm=1 tr=0 a=AppmJ/7ZOOFWL/q6u6u93g==:117 a=AppmJ/7ZOOFWL/q6u6u93g==:17 a=ayC55rCoAAAA:8 a=fNEgcOh0sVsA:10 a=9i_RQKNPAAAA:8 a=lO1Oj33HGwup3sfYImsA:9 X-Cloudmark-Score: 0 X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Genre and OS details not recognized. X-Received-From: 107.14.73.228 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:178835 Archived-At: Stefan Monnier writes: >>>> For example, as far as I can see -- and I've looked, though maybe in the >>>> wrong places -- there's never been a permanent sign anywhere, like on a >>>> web page, telling developers when they should commit to release branches >>>> versus when they should commit to master (trunk). > > I'd be happy to put such info somewhere, but I'm not sure where that > should go. I see two problems to solve: > - Make sure people don't commit to the wrong branch. > - Help people find out where to commit. > The two are closely related, yet different: many contributors end up > contributing to the wrong branch because they don't even know that > there's a decision to make about which branch to use. > > Since most pople aren't going to check a docfile or webpage every time > they commit, just on the off-chance that the rules have changed, it's > important for these rules to be permanent, if we want them to work > well. Good point. > So, I think we should say that we always have 2 branches: > - master, for the bleeding edge. > - stable, for bug fixes. +1 > For the last few releases, the process has been: > - when we're ready to start the release: freeze the trunk. > - a month or so later: cut a release branch from the trunk, re-open the > trunk to changes. > - keep on fixing bugs on the release branch, updating the doc, then make > pretest releases, and finally after several more months: make a release. > > The purpose of the "freeze the trunk" is to try and get people to focus > on fixing bugs for a while. I'm not sure it's very effective, tho. We could try to leave trunk open, but put in a commit preprocessor that looks for "fixes bug [0-9]+". It could then either refuse the commit, or issue a stern warning. >> > >> Maybe we should simply move all that into etc/CONTRIBUTE, and leave in >> > >> admin/notes only stuff that is minor/obscure etc. > [...] >> We can have a section there labeled "if you have write access to the >> repository". I see nothing wrong with that, and no need to have yet >> another file with possibly contradictory instructions. > > I don't have a strong opinion on any of this, but if we want this info > to be effective, we should make it as visible as possible, i.e. not in > admin/notes (which no newcomer would think of consulting) but in > ./CONTRIBUTE (that's right: not in `etc' either but at the toplevel). I'll take a stab at writing that. > And it should be kept as short as possible (e.g. things like formatting > of references to particular revisions is the kind of nitpicking we > don't need in there). I'll refer to admin/notes/* for "more advanced developers". -- -- Stephe