opencog-dev team mailing list archive

[Cassio Pennachin <cassio@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

No, because then no one can guarantee that main is stable.  The  
merging back to main should be based on stability, not fixed time  
intervals.

If you want to commit frequently, you should commit to staging, or to  
your own branch which is periodically merged into staging.  Anyway,  
developers are responsible for not breaking the staging branch.

If Joel needs code that's not in staging, it's because whoever wrote  
that code didn't follow these policies.  I believe one can create a  
patch for that code, and the developer who wrote it can then merge it  
with staging and fix incompatibilities.  Does that make sense?

Cassio

On Oct 27, 2008, at 3:52 PM, Linas Vepstas wrote:

> 2008/10/27 Cassio Pennachin <cassio@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>:
> > Once staging is deemed stable enough, Gama will merge it into main.
>
> As Joel points out, the problem here seems to be that the staging
> branch, and the main branch has diverged. That is, some of the
> code that he needs is in staging, and some is in main -- and he's
> stuck, because there is no one branch that has everything that he
> needs.
>
> Presumably the problem arose because no one is  rebasing
> staging on the current main branch.
>
> Thus, one of the policies should probably be "rebase staging on
> main every day", or at least weekly.  Would that work?
>
> --linas
>
> --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google  
> Groups "OpenCog General & Scientific Discussion List" group.
> To post to this group, send email to opencog@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to opencog+unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/opencog?hl=en
> -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

--
Cassio Pennachin
CEO, Vetta Labs
www.vettalabs.com -- +55(31)3421-6933