From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: =?UTF-8?B?TGx1w61z?= Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Locks on the Bzr repository Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2010 19:12:35 +0200 Message-ID: <868w3wx7cs.wl%lluis@fulla.xlab.taz> References: <4C6E1F0A.7070506@swipnet.se> <837hjlr78p.fsf@gnu.org> <87zkwhtws5.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> <83tymppj62.fsf@gnu.org> <871v9t8klf.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> <83lj81pazq.fsf@gnu.org> <83aaogpcbu.fsf@gnu.org> <87vd737pxd.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> <83pqxboi38.fsf@gnu.org> <19568.59349.718000.978281@gargle.gargle.HOWL> <19570.10774.921000.853692@gargle.gargle.HOWL> <878w3x7h8u.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> <19570.27753.731000.392172@gargle.gargle.HOWL> <87zkwc5xnr.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> <86hbikxk3k.wl%lluis@fulla.xlab.taz> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI 1.14.6 - "Maruoka") Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1282669970 5609 80.91.229.12 (24 Aug 2010 17:12:50 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2010 17:12:50 +0000 (UTC) To: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue Aug 24 19:12:49 2010 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Onx3G-0004yB-Ro for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 24 Aug 2010 19:12:47 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:37455 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Onx3G-0005Av-E7 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 24 Aug 2010 13:12:46 -0400 Original-Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=46509 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Onx39-000592-5e for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 24 Aug 2010 13:12:40 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Onx37-0000Ev-Q7 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 24 Aug 2010 13:12:38 -0400 Original-Received: from mailout-de.gmx.net ([213.165.64.23]:54258 helo=mail.gmx.net) by eggs.gnu.org with smtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Onx37-0000Ee-8y for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 24 Aug 2010 13:12:37 -0400 Original-Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 24 Aug 2010 17:12:35 -0000 Original-Received: from 89.Red-83-50-198.dynamicIP.rima-tde.net (EHLO localhost) [83.50.198.89] by mail.gmx.net (mp071) with SMTP; 24 Aug 2010 19:12:35 +0200 X-Authenticated: #12333383 X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX18pVDMvfpkpLHoSA8/lMDjgtId2RPIzBmR8wcM0n7 XflqutYymLvhxv In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Wanderlust/2.15.9 (Almost Unreal) SEMI/1.14.6 (Maruoka) FLIM/1.14.9 (=?UTF-8?B?R29qxY0=?=) APEL/10.8 Emacs/23.2 (i486-pc-linux-gnu) MULE/6.0 (HANACHIRUSATO) X-Y-GMX-Trusted: 0 X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Genre and OS details not recognized. X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:129164 Archived-At: Uday S Reddy writes: > Llu=C3=ADs writes: >> Just to make sure I understand it. Suppose I'm working on a branch >> with a fairly large set of changes and it has been merged back to >> trunk. After a while a bug is found on my code, which was not >> thoroughly tested, or a new relatively minor functionality is added >> related to the code on my branch. Should this be committed on my >> branch and then followed with a merge to trunk? Or should this live >> in a completely new branch that will be merged back to trunk once >> it's well tested? > In Bazaar, it is fine to continue adding to a branch after it has been > merged once. Next time it is merged, Bazaar can figure out which > revisions are new and merge them appropriately. Sure, my only concern is on how the history will look like. Suppose I have commits (f1, f2, f3) implemeting some feature. These are merged into trunk = as revision f. Then I fix a simple bug on the feature (ff11) and merge again as ff1. Fix another bug with multiple commits (ff21, ff22) and fix another one= with a single commit (ff31). If now I merge, both fixes are merged into trunk, a= nd supposing they are independent from each other, ideally they should appear = as two different entries on the history in trunk (ff2 and ff3). >> Now that I think of it, I think I start to see the reason for nested >> history and the suggestion of not using rebase. Even for the >> smallest bug fix or feature addition, a full branch should be >> created, and every change should be thoroughly tested in >> there. Then, trunk would be composed of just merge messages like >> "add subsystem Y", "add feature X to subsystem Y", "fix bug N on >> Y". This would produce a log in trunk that would very closely >> resemble the contents of a NEWS file, but at the expense of a strict >> branch/test/merge discipline, which is not bad per-se. > There is no harm in creating task branches for individual bug fixes. > But, that in itself doesn't make one virtuous. The crucial testing to > be done is *after you merge it into trunk*. Testing in the task > branch is not enough. Every time you do pull/update/merge, you need > to test again. =20 > The workflow recommended for "Quick Fixes" in the Wiki has no logical > problem, even though it avoids task branches. Its only problem is > that it is slow, especially when used with an sftp server. See above. But basically, we agree as long as you merge on each fix. Of course, this is all to, at the end, have a history in trunk that is show= n as: ... f ... ff1 .... ff2 .... ff3 ... so that history quickly shows at a high level what has been changed just by looking at the "first level" of the history. Lluis --=20 "And it's much the same thing with knowledge, for whenever you learn something new, the whole world becomes that much richer." -- The Princess of Pure Reason, as told by Norton Juster in The Phantom Tollbooth