[Kde-games-devel] Konquest

[laurent Montel]

Le Thursday 08 January 2015 20:27:19 Albert Astals Cid a écrit :
> El Dijous, 8 de gener de 2015, a les 20:14:33, Inge Wallin va escriure:
> > On Thursday, January 08, 2015 19:58:54 Albert Astals Cid wrote:
> > > El Dijous, 8 de gener de 2015, a les 19:19:12, Inge Wallin va escriure:
> > > > Regarding bugfixes, they can be handled in two ways:
> > > > 1. Add them to master and cherry-pick in release branches (the
> > > > calligra
> > > > way) 2. Add them to the release branches and merge them to master (the
> > > > kde-edu way) I don't know how they are actually supposed to be handled
> > > > in
> > > > kde-games.
> > > 
> > > Merging is always safer than cherry-picking (you never forget stuff in
> > > one
> > > of the branches). I never understood why calligra decided to go the
> > > cherry-
> > > picking way.
> > 
> > Well, sometimes you don't want to forward port a bugfix. An example could
> > be that the bug itself doesn't exist anymore or a completely different
> > solution is needed in master due to a big refactor. The cherry-pick
> > method at least gives you a choice.
> 
> If the bugfix doesn't apply you can merge and then revert explaining why it
> doesn't apply to this branch, and if it conflicts you can just resolve the
> conflict properly, sure sometimes it's not trivial but I don't think that
> happens often and i sincerely think it outweights the problem of leaving
> fixes behind.
> 
> > I think that there is less refactoring going
> > on in kde-edu applications since they are generally smaller, so it's
> > probably more appropriate there.
> > 
> > All of this said, what *is* the preferred method for handling bugfixes in
> > kde- games?
> 
> I'm voting for merge :D
> 

I'm voting for merge too.
I use it in kdepim* and it's safe
Regards