>That's laudable, but a non-professional developer who just submitted a >fix and doesn't follow all the other changes going on might have a >different opinion.
Wouldn't we expect those external patchers to submit changes to dev only? Then the module maintainer, or an LTS version maintainer (is there a maintainer for each LTS version?) would decide whether the change should be cherrypicked into an LTS version. martin ________________________________________ From: Development <[email protected]> on behalf of Robert Loehning <[email protected]> Sent: Monday, January 28, 2019 1:27:20 PM To: Volker Hilsheimer Cc: Qt development mailing list Subject: Re: [Development] Proposal: New branch model Am 24.01.2019 um 10:20 schrieb Volker Hilsheimer: >> On 24 Jan 2019, at 08:03, Olivier Goffart <[email protected]> wrote: >> [...]> - Stay with the current solution <= the merge effort is too big >> and qt6 is >>> expected to cause conflicts that really should not be solved by one person >> >> Again, I don't see how the proposed model reduce the amount of conflicts. >> If the "one person" is the problem, then nothing prevents you to assign more >> people to the job. One easy way is already to share the different modules >> (repositories). But with some cooperation it is also possible to share the >> work accross directories, or by number of commits. One can also be pragmatic >> and revert most problematic commit (that fails tests) in dev or stable, then >> let the author work at it again. > > Having to wait for someone else to trigger the merge and resolve the various > conflicts before I can continue to base my work on dev on a fix that I > already made in 5.12 breaks flow. Distributing this work to more people > doesn’t solve the problem. > > The whole notion that my change has to become someone else’s problem by > design of the merge process is more than just a little crazy to me. I want to > own my change, have control over which branches it hits, and be responsible > for cleaning up the mess my change might have caused. The current model > doesn’t give me any of that beyond the initial merge. That's laudable, but a non-professional developer who just submitted a fix and doesn't follow all the other changes going on might have a different opinion. Cheers, Robert -- Robert Löhning, Software Engineer - The Qt Company GmbH The Qt Company GmbH, Rudower Chaussee 13, D-12489 Berlin Geschäftsführer: Mika Pälsi, Juha Varelius, Mika Harjuaho Sitz der Gesellschaft: Berlin, Registergericht: Amtsgericht Charlottenburg, HRB 144331 B _______________________________________________ Development mailing list [email protected] https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development _______________________________________________ Development mailing list [email protected] https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development
