On 06/05/11 02:05, Manuel M T Chakravarty wrote:
There seems to be quite a bit of merging from master into branches
going on in the GHC repos at the moment. This isn't necessarily a
good way of using Git as Linus explains in this message:
http://www.mail-archive.com/dri-devel@lists.sourceforge.net/msg39091.html
The way I understand it is that Git avoids the performance problems
of darcs when branching and merging (by not trying to commute
patches), but the price we have to pay for that is the resulting
fixed order of patches as well as merge patches cluttering up the
history. So, maintaining branches requires a bit more care.
I'm not sure Linus's concerns about merging apply to us. He's worried
about people merging the current state of his tree into other branches,
because intermediate states of his tree between releases are not
necessarily sane - there could be experimental code that gets completely
removed before a release. In contrast, the GHC master branch is
intended to be relatively sane at all times, we don't have big
experimental changes that get backed out again. So I don't think it's
such a problem to sync branches with master from time to time - indeed
it makes managing branches much easier, because you can merge incrementally.
Cheers,
Simon
_______________________________________________
Cvs-ghc mailing list
Cvs-ghc@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/cvs-ghc
