Patch/integration policy

Patch/integration policy

[Andrej Borsenkow]

Now with forked CVS we have to decide

- how patches are posted
- how patches are integrated.

Posting - should patches be posted for both stable and development?

Integration - are patch authors responsible for applying them to both
branches? Or we designate some person(s) who will maintain stable version
and integrate patches fron HEAD while other will continue in HEAD as before?

-andrej

Re: Patch/integration policy

[Bart Schaefer]

On Jun 6, 11:07am, Andrej Borsenkow wrote:
}
} Now with forked CVS we have to decide
} 
} Posting - should patches be posted for both stable and development?

Patches should be posted for the development branch only, IMO.  It's not
a problem to post both as long as they're labeled appropriately, but the
development version is called that for a reason ...

} Integration - are patch authors responsible for applying them to both
} branches? Or we designate some person(s) who will maintain stable
} version and integrate patches fron HEAD while other will continue in
} HEAD as before?

The second of those would be preferable, I think, though there's no way
we can actually prevent anyone who has commit access from doing the first.

-- 
Bart Schaefer                                 Brass Lantern Enterprises
http://www.well.com/user/barts              http://www.brasslantern.com

Zsh: http://www.zsh.org | PHPerl Project: http://phperl.sourceforge.net   

Re: Patch/integration policy

[Peter Stephenson]

"Andrej Borsenkow" wrote:
> Now with forked CVS we have to decide
> 
> - how patches are posted
> - how patches are integrated.
> 
> Posting - should patches be posted for both stable and development?

We've done this before.  They only need posting separately at all if they
are designed for both versions and the same patch doesn't apply to both.
Bart tended to submit altered versions for 3.0 where necessary, but we
didn't have the archive then.  I imagine people using 4.0 won't need
up-to-the minute patches posted here unless they refer to a particular
problem which has turned off.  So we probably won't usually need to post
4.0 patches.

> Integration - are patch authors responsible for applying them to both
> branches? Or we designate some person(s) who will maintain stable version
> and integrate patches fron HEAD while other will continue in HEAD as before?

Preferably the original author can commit it to both branches if that's
necessary, at least until the rate of fixes dies down.

-- 
Peter Stephenson <pws@csr.com>                  Software Engineer
CSR Ltd., Unit 300, Science Park, Milton Road,
Cambridge, CB4 0XL, UK                          Tel: +44 (0)1223 392070


**********************************************************************
The information transmitted is intended only for the person or
entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential 
and/or privileged material. 
Any review, retransmission, dissemination or other use of, or
taking of any action in reliance upon, this information by 
persons or entities other than the intended recipient is 
prohibited.  
If you received this in error, please contact the sender and 
delete the material from any computer.
**********************************************************************