-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Robert Collins wrote:
> On Thu, 2008-03-27 at 22:03 -0400, Tres Seaver wrote:
>>
>> I thought I understood that 'bzr' encouraged the "fix on the old rev
>> and
>> forward port" model over "backporting / cherry picking"? In the style
>> described at:
>>
>> http://www.venge.net/mtn-wiki/DaggyFixes
>
> I think that daggyfixes is the tail shaking the dog.
>
> Folk usually don't know how far back a problem goes when they realise a
> problem exists; where the fix exists in the global revision dag is a
> technical issue for vcs authors, it should not be something code authors
> need to think about.
OK. I had the impression that bzr's model was "branch happy" (compared
to CVS / SVN), which would seem to me to make "forward porting" more
attractive.
For instance, in supportig Zope2, we often need to do a fix across
multiple supported releases: e.g., if somebody reported a security
issue today, we might end up releasing fixes for Zope 2.8 and 2.9, as
well as 2.10 (the currently released branch) and 2.11 (the
almost-ready-for-prime-time branch). I've even done one fix in this
configuration for 2.7 (because there are a large number of production
systems on 2.7, including a couple of my clients).
My experience with such fixes indicates that it is much easier to fix
the oldest stuff, and than forward port, compared to fixing the trunk,
and then backporting. That made the "daggy fixes" model seem quite
natural to me.
Tres.
- --
===================================================================
Tres Seaver +1 540-429-0999 tseaver@palladion.com
Palladion Software "Excellence by Design" http://palladion.com
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iD8DBQFH7FdB+gerLs4ltQ4RAkmhAKCm+rGNEcIicIebAaxNnfj++c4uRwCgscMD
3ny2d8pBxxPrFWmXKm3Z+H8=
=maXL
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Received on Thu Mar 27 2008 - 20:26:04 MDT
This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Tue Apr 01 2008 - 13:00:10 MDT