From: David P G. <gr...@us...> - 2007-06-25 01:37:00
|
Ian worte: > Peter Donald wrote: > > This change and 12802 have nothing to do with "RVM-91-NewThreadModel" > > and should not be committed against the branch but instead done in the > > trunk and merged across into the branch if necessary. > Sure, feel free to pull across but I will move them when the branch is > stable. I'm not planning to work on the head for the foreseeable future. I agree with Peter. Branches need to be focused and minimalist. That's the whole point. I absolutely do not want to see RVM-91-NewThreadModel become "everything Ian feels like working on in the next month." That's not how we have agreed to do work on this project. If you want to work on things that don't fit under the scope of RVM-91, then you need to have multiple checkouts and do each piece of work in the appropriate branch/head tree. It's not that much more work for you and makes things significantly simpler when it times to evaluate whether/how the changes from the branch get merged back into the trunk. This has been beaten to death in the past. Do we really have to go through all of that again to reach exactly the same conclusion? --dave |