mahout-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Trevor Grant <trevor.d.gr...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Proposal for changing Mahout's Git branching rules
Date Wed, 21 Jun 2017 22:25:21 GMT
So right now, if there was a bug in 0.13.0 that needed an important patch-
why not just merge it into master and  git branch "branch-0.13.0"

On Wed, Jun 21, 2017 at 4:26 PM, Dmitriy Lyubimov <dlieu.7@gmail.com> wrote:

> PS. but i see the rational. to have stable fixes to get into release.
> perhaps named release branches is still a way to go if one cuts them early
> enough.
>
> On Wed, Jun 21, 2017 at 2:25 PM, Dmitriy Lyubimov <dlieu.7@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Jun 21, 2017 at 2:17 PM, Pat Ferrel <pat@occamsmachete.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > Since merges are done by committers, it’s easy to retarget a
> contributor’s
> >> PRs but committers would PR against develop,
> >
> > IMO it is anything but easy to resolve conflicts, let alone somebody
> > else's. Spark just asks me to resolve them myself. But if you don't have
> > proper target, you can't ask the contributor.
> >
> > and some projects like PredictionIO make develop the default branch on
> >> github so it's the one contributors get by default.
> >>
> > That would fix it but i am not sure if we have access to HEAD on github
> > mirror. Might involve INFRA to do it  And in that case  it would amount
> > little more but renaming. It would seem it is much easier to create a
> > branch, "stable master" or something, and consider master to be ongoing
> PR
> > base.
> >
> > -1 on former, -0 on the latter. Judging from the point of both
> contributor
> > and committer (of which I am both).it will not make my life easy on
> either
> > end.
> >
> >
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message