[IPython-dev] Bzr merge idiosyncracies...

Ville M. Vainio vivainio at gmail.com
Wed Jun 4 02:55:56 EDT 2008

On Wed, Jun 4, 2008 at 5:01 AM, Fernando Perez <fperez.net at gmail.com> wrote:

> I can't believe that this is actually something that bazaar considers
> a 'feature' and they promote as a valid design point.  The fact that
> you've merged someone else's work into your branch because you happen
> to be a maintainer, for example, doesn't make their work in any way
> 'second class'.  I agree 100% percent with Linus here (post linked to
> in the vcscompare post):

This is something that works very well in practice, provided that the
branch work is of reasonable size - one feature, bugfix, etc. The idea
is that the log message is detailed enough to describe what was
merged. It should not be "merged stuff".

This liberates the commit policy in the branch, you can experiment and
play around a bit more when the end result will appear as single
well-contained commit.

In my last project the policy was "single commit per bugfix", using an
official commit template. It worked just fine, and you could easily
find what bugfix caused a problem, who did it, etc. You are not
interested it 10+ micro-commits that the original fixer did.

We should pick up a policy where we add the branch owners name as the
first thing in the log message, for people who don't have trunk

As far as linux goes - the development hierarchy is multilayered,
which is not the case with us. There are no people who consolidate
small branches to big branches that are merged to trunk, but rather
the small branches are integrated directly to trunk.

Ville M. Vainio - vivainio.googlepages.com
blog=360.yahoo.com/villevainio - g[mail | talk]='vivainio'

More information about the IPython-dev mailing list