Subject: Re: [boost] [git] Mercurial? easy merging in svn, how about git/hg?
From: Frank Birbacher (bloodymir.crap_at_[hidden])
Date: 2012-04-02 14:04:40
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Am 02.04.12 10:49, schrieb Martin Geisler:
> Frank Birbacher <bloodymir.crap_at_[hidden]> writes:
>> This means the person to do the fix has to do a merge, too.
> Not necessarily: I can commit a bugfix to stable without being the
> one who merges stable in dev.
> In practice, I'm probably the one who are in the best position to
> do the merge since I understand my bugfix and so I can decide how
> to apply it on dev. But I can delay the merge or ask someone else
> to do it instead.
Well, if there is one guy to do the merge of stable into dev and
everyone on the team would send an email request that states which
changes not to merge then this guy will have a hard time.
In svn the blocking merge is recorded in the system. So whenever
anyone will merge the stable into dev svn will know which changes not
to merge. How does hg/git help in communicating this? Imagine a branch
where many developers do bugfixes and someone will once a week merge
things into dev. How shall he know which changes to skip?
I can hardly imaging how such a workflow would be feasible with hg/git.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG/MacGPG2 v2.0.17 (Darwin)
Comment: GPGTools - http://gpgtools.org
Comment: keyserver x-hkp://pool.sks-keyservers.net
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk