Merge or Cherry-Pick?

[Wolfgang Rohdewald]

please ignore this - I should have first read the rest of
the thread - others already had the same arguments

On Donnerstag 03 Februar 2011, Wolfgang Rohdewald wrote:
> On Mittwoch 02 Februar 2011, Thiago Macieira wrote:
> > > if I continue developing the app in master and fix some
> > > bugs on the way, the fixes will be in master first. I
> > > would not always want to put them into 4.6 at once
> > > because testing in master is much easier and comes at
> > > much less cost while development goes on. So I might even
> > > want to wait some days or even weeks until backporting
> > > fixes.
> > 
> > Laziness is not an argument -- it's just an excuse.
> > 
> > If you find a bug that applies to 4.6, why will you not fix
> > it there?
> 
> sometimes because 4.6 is already frozen, so I wait until I
> can commit for 4.6.1. In general I see first testing in master
> as an additional level of testing - after backporting
> to 4.6 I can still test that again as needed.
> 
> and - how often did you test something only to find out
> later that the user does things differently and finds
> different bugs? using the bug-fixed master for development
> did already help me to avoid backporting bugs.
> 
> > In my experience, testing the stable releases is easier.
> > Testing the  development versions usually cause trouble
> > because of unfinished features and untested new code.
> 
> for Kajongg I am practically the only developer so I
> normally know what is going on
> 
> but I like Felix's idea - create a new branch in master
> for every bug fix I expect to backport. I will
> definitely have to learn more about git...


-- 
Wolfgang
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.kde.org/pipermail/kde-core-devel/attachments/20110203/1fb0ba83/attachment.htm>