From: Geert U. <ge...@li...> - 2000-06-16 09:59:19
|
On Fri, 16 Jun 2000, Michel Dänzer wrote: > Frank Petzold wrote: > > On Fri, Jun 16, 2000 at 11:41:15AM +0300, Jouko Pynnonen wrote: > > > What's the committing policy? Some of the changes are temporary fixes so i > > > thought it's better to discuss on the list whether they make sense. I can > > > post the diffs though. > > > > It is probably best to spawn a branch and commit to that. > > I don't agree for the 2.3 module. Everybody knows that code in there is > unstable. And what's the use of CVS if everybody spawns a branch for what he's > working on? > > And at least in this case, I guess everyone likes to have a booting kernel in > the first place, even if it may have its quirks. If you have a quick fix, you can check it in on the main branch. Branches are meant for larger subprojects that take more work to be finished. When the subproject is finished, you merge the main branch to it and verify that it still works. After that you merge the subproject branch to the main branch. Gr{oetje,eeting}s, Geert -- Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- ge...@li... In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that. -- Linus Torvalds |