On Wed, May 26, 2010 at 9:49 PM, Jarrod Millman <millman@berkeley.edu> wrote:

On Wed, May 26, 2010 at 8:08 PM, Matthew Brett <matthew.brett@gmail.com> wrote:
> That's the model we've gone for in nipy and ipython too. We wrote it
> up in a workflow doc project. Here are the example docs giving the
> git workflow for ipython:
>
> https://cirl.berkeley.edu/mb312/gitwash/
>
> and in particular:
>
> https://cirl.berkeley.edu/mb312/gitwash/development_workflow.html

I would highly recommend using this workflow. Ideally, we should use
the same git workflow for all the scipy-related projects. That way
developers can switch between projects without having to switch
workflows. The model that Matthew and Fernando developed for nipy and
ipython seem like a very reasonable place to start.

__

I wouldn't. Who is going to be the gate keeper and pull the stuff? No vacations for him/her, on 24 hour call, yes? They might as well run a dairy. And do we really want all pull requests cross-posted to the list? Linus works full time as gatekeeper for Linux and gets paid for the effort. I think a central repository model would work better for us.

Chuck