apt-zeroconf team mailing list archive

[Christopher James Halse Rogers <chalserogers@xxxxxxxxx>]

On Thu, 2009-07-09 at 23:10 -0400, Adam J. Lincoln wrote: 
> What up all,
>     While not trying to speak for the crew that did the Sunday hack on
> this a few weeks ago, I think the sense was that trunk needs much more
> care and that personal/other team branches should see the action.
> Broken trunk is always bad.
> 
>     I've been involved in projects where one person controls trunk, but
> not where merges to trunk are done by peer review.  Is there a good
> place to read about how that might be done?  And is there still a
> "leader" who has final say?

GNOME Do uses a workflow where (almost) all[1] commits get merged in
through Launchpad merge reviews; Launchpad's review functionality is
actually pretty awesome, and can be done entirely via email.  The policy
is that a member of the ~do-core team needs to review & mark the merge
as "approved" before it gets merged.  This works quite well, and I'd
hope that Tarmac would be able to handle this workflow.

If we had unittests there would be an additional requirement that all
tests pass, of course.

[1] "Trivial" commits and bugfixes sometimes get committed directly.
This isn't a big problem, as developers generally have a reasonably
consistent idea of what "trivial" means now.  This doesn't have to be
allowed by policy, though.

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part