[Kdenlive-devel] Git workflow
avilla at FreeBSD.org
Mon Nov 7 14:00:33 UTC 2011
On Mon, Nov 7, 2011 at 9:56 AM, Mikko Rapeli <mikko.rapeli at iki.fi> wrote:
>> Reverting sets of commits is definitely not a solution.
> Yes it is. If a set of commits breaks other functionality, those patches
> should either be fixed or reverted. That's how Linux kernel is maintained.
This is not a good point to discuss with a FreeBSD developer.
Just kidding. ;)
> There's nothing wrong in reverting a set of patches, asking the author to fix
> them, and applying a fixed version later on.
> This gives the tree maintainer some options to keep the master branch in
> releasable state.
Which is what the integration branch is made for. Reverting means
you'll have less occasions to test new features/fixes; it means you'll
have to revert the whole set of commits instead of just finding what's
wrong and fix it. And leads to Git history mess.
Alberto Villa, FreeBSD committer <avilla at FreeBSD.org>
More information about the Kdenlive