1 |
On Sun, May 8, 2016 at 8:18 AM, Kent Fredric <kentfredric@×××××.com> wrote: |
2 |
> On 9 May 2016 at 00:09, Anthony G. Basile <blueness@g.o> wrote: |
3 |
>> 1. announce to gentoo-dev@ the intention to start a branch intending to |
4 |
>> merge |
5 |
>> |
6 |
>> 2. hack hack hack |
7 |
>> |
8 |
>> 3. test the merge for any conflicts etc, |
9 |
>> |
10 |
>> 4. announce to the list a date/time to merge |
11 |
>> |
12 |
>> 5. if okay, ermge |
13 |
> |
14 |
> It would make much sense for this series to be visible on Master as a |
15 |
> "add Perl 5.24 to tree" commit, because all the changes are inherently |
16 |
> interdependent, |
17 |
> and it would make little sense to rewind to a specific point within |
18 |
> that series and use it as a portage tree. |
19 |
> |
20 |
> But that's not significant enough to warrant a lot of formal fluffing around. |
21 |
> |
22 |
> It for sure would be best if that 100 commit range was rebased before |
23 |
> merging, but it should still be a non-fast-forward merge just to keep |
24 |
> the history logical. |
25 |
> |
26 |
|
27 |
++ |
28 |
|
29 |
merges shouldn't just be used for random pull-requests. However, when |
30 |
you're touching multiple packages/etc they should be considered. They |
31 |
should also be considered if for some reason you had a bazillion |
32 |
commits to a single package that for some reason shouldn't be rebased. |
33 |
I imagine that they'll be a small portion of commits as a result. |
34 |
However, for the situations where they're appropriate they make a lot |
35 |
of sense. |
36 |
|
37 |
This was some of Duncan's point, but I will comment that we'll never |
38 |
have as clean a history as the kernel simply because we don't have a |
39 |
release-based workflow with the work cascading up various trees. The |
40 |
kernel is almost an ideal case for a merge-based workflow. I imagine |
41 |
that half of Gentoo's commit volume is random revbumps and keyword |
42 |
changes and that is just going to be noise no matter what. If we were |
43 |
release-based we could do that stuff in its own branch and merge it |
44 |
all in at once, but that just isn't us. |
45 |
|
46 |
-- |
47 |
Rich |