[Lame-dev] Merging Takehiro's branch with the head branch

[Alexander L. <Alexander@Leidinger.net>]

On Fri, 23 Aug 2002 12:07:04 +0900 Takehiro Tominaga
<tak...@in...> wrote:

Hi list/Robert, I asked Takehiro when he will merge his branch with the
head branch, the discussion diverted into multiple topics.

>     A> And there are also some commits with new features and
>     A> changes which change the testcase. Personally I like to see the
>     A> non intrusive changes (e.g.  bugfixes and changes which don't
>     A> affect the testcases (like reorganisation of the code)) merged
>     A> seperately.
> 
> I think so too and that is what I used to do.
> 
> But this is not enough and easy.
> For example, some bugfix makes the breakage of testcase.

Post a patch to lame-dev, wait a week so interested people can look at
it (Mark way want to be prepared for the testcase change), then commit
it if nobody complains. If someone finds a bug after the commit, get
enough info to fix it, if nobody cares enough to provide you with enough
infos but reverts to a known good version instead (without your OK), I
will speak up. Reverting without providing enough infos to reproduce the
bug is bad.

> BTW, there is another reason why I hesitate to merge my tree into main
> tree.
> 
> I started my own tree because Robert's message 
> 
> Subject: Re: [Lame-dev] reverting back to last known working CVS
> From: Robert Hegemann <Rob...@gm...>
> To: Takehiro Tominaga <tak...@in...>
> Cc: lam...@li...
> Message-Id: <200...@gm...>
> 
> He said my test is not enough.
> But, I can't reproduce the "BUG" what he said still.

Is the problem by any chance related to compiler options/version/type (I
don't have the message at hand)?

> On the other hand, I reported the problem in this mail
> 
> Subject: [Lame-dev] alt-preset was broken after 2002 May 20
> From: Takehiro Tominaga <tak...@in...>
> To: Rob...@gm...
> Cc: lam...@li...
> Message-Id: <200...@in...>
> 
> and the same problem was also reported on hydrogenaudio.org
> 
> http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/showthread.php?s=8fa067685f5d087cd7ada6793b7a727d&threadid=2663
> 
> But, on the ML, no one including Robert answers. It seems nobody wants

I've CCed him.

> to test/check the code. Or my test method is quite differ from anyone.
> 
> I am afraid of that merging the tree will make LAME so bad because of
> my lack of test or come to nothing, by someone reverting it.

Was Robert the only one seeing the problem? Do both of you ruled out
differences in the development environment? Did you asked him to test if
you actual version does the same?

>     >> PS.  If you want to continue this kind of development strategy
>     >> about merging/branching/checking..., pls be on lame-dev because
>     >> I want to share the direction.
> 
>     A> I dont understand what you want to say. Can you please try
>     A> again?
> 
> Ok. To digest what I want to say is,
> 
> "why you mail me directly ? why don't you mail it to and discuss it on
> lame-dev mailing list ?"

Because I thought the question isn't "Does the branch get merged?". It's
common sense for me to use the features of tools I use. Branching lets
more people look at the work in progress, I just thought you did it
because you wanted to share you work in progress so other people which
want to contribute to it do have the possibility to do it in a
comfortable way.

Bye,
Alexander.

-- 
                       There's no place like ~

http://www.Leidinger.net                       Alexander @ Leidinger.net
  GPG fingerprint = C518 BC70 E67F 143F BE91  3365 79E2 9C60 B006 3FE7