Mercurial > emacs
diff admin/notes/bzr @ 108637:4a00100075b5
* admin/notes/bzr: New file.
More mailing-list wisdom. Probably should be merged with commits.
author | Glenn Morris <rgm@gnu.org> |
---|---|
date | Mon, 17 May 2010 19:52:21 -0700 |
parents | |
children | c8d754c15c55 |
line wrap: on
line diff
--- /dev/null Thu Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 +0000 +++ b/admin/notes/bzr Mon May 17 19:52:21 2010 -0700 @@ -0,0 +1,32 @@ +NOTES ON COMMITTING TO EMACS'S BAZAAR REPO -*- outline -*- + +* Install changes only on one branch, let them get merged elsewhere if needed. +In particular, install bug-fixes only on the release branch (if there +is one) and let them get synced to the trunk; do not install them by +hand on the trunk as well. E.g. if there is an active "emacs-23" branch +and you have a bug-fix appropriate for the next Emacs-23.x release, +install it only on the emacs-23 branch, not on the trunk as well. + +Installing things manually into more than one branch makes merges more +difficult. + +http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-devel/2010-03/msg01124.html + +* Backporting a bug-fix from the trunk to a branch (e.g. "emacs-23"). +Label the commit as a backport, e.g. by starting the commit message with +"Backport:". This is helpful for the person merging the release branch +to the trunk. + +http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-devel/2010-05/msg00262.html + +* Installing changes from your personal branches. +If your branch has only a single commit, or many different real +commits, it is fine to do a merge. If your branch has only a very +small number of "real" commits, but several "merge from trunks", it is +preferred that you take your branch's diff, apply it to the trunk, and +commit directly, not merge. This keeps the history cleaner. + +Or use shelves; or rebase; or do something else. See the thread for +yet another fun excursion into the exciting world of version control. + +http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-devel/2010-04/msg00086.html