Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.lang.python > #68849

Re: Question about Source Control

Show all headers | View raw

On 3/23/2014 10:04 PM, Chris Angelico wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 24, 2014 at 12:26 PM, Terry Reedy <tjreedy@udel.edu> wrote:
>> With multiple branches (as with 2.7, 3.4, and default for cpython) and
>> multiple active developers (20?) commiting to those brances, commits are
>> definitely not free. I would not exactly call them as cheap as you seem to
>> imply either. That said, I have occasionally pushed interim changes that put
>> code in an improved and stable state.
>>
>> N. Coughlan has suggested improving the cpython infrastructure and
>> procedures to reduce the cost of commits to encourage more people to make
>> more commits (in the sense of more lines changed, not more pieces) and
>> improve cpython faster.
>
> When I call them cheap, what I mean is that there's little difference
> between a single commit and 2-3 commits as a group.  Yes, there's a bit
> more difference when you're cherry-picking them to other branches, and
> maybe an infrastructure/procedure change could help with that; but
> once they're there in history, it doesn't hurt to have three separate
> commits doing related work, keeping the distinct parts distinct.

Every commit to a 3.x maintenance branch (now 3.4) must be forward 
merged into the 3.(x+1) default (now the future 3.5), even if it is just 
a null merge. The point of this policy is to keep the repository in a 
coherent state. If a bug were fixed in maintenance but not default, it 
would create a regression situation, the same as if it were fixed in 
default and then broken again by a separate patch.

Part of the planned (hoped-for) change (using a system that is already 
working for another project with even more code and committers) is to 
automatically test patches on the buildbots before they are committed to 
the central repository, rather than after. Each would be tested and 
accepted or rejected separately. So each commit would have to stand on 
its own even more than now.

-- 
Terry Jan Reedy

Back to comp.lang.python | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

Re: Question about Source Control "Frank Millman" <frank@chagford.com> - 2014-03-18 08:42 +0200
  Re: Question about Source Control Gregory Ewing <greg.ewing@canterbury.ac.nz> - 2014-03-19 10:51 +1300
    Re: Question about Source Control Terry Reedy <tjreedy@udel.edu> - 2014-03-18 21:38 -0400
    Re: Question about Source Control Tim Chase <python.list@tim.thechases.com> - 2014-03-18 21:12 -0500
      Re: Question about Source Control albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2014-03-22 17:32 +0000
        Re: Question about Source Control Tim Chase <python.list@tim.thechases.com> - 2014-03-22 13:49 -0500
        Re: Question about Source Control Albert-Jan Roskam <fomcl@yahoo.com> - 2014-03-22 13:01 -0700
        Re: Question about Source Control Dave Angel <davea@davea.name> - 2014-03-22 22:18 -0400
        Re: Question about Source Control Albert-Jan Roskam <fomcl@yahoo.com> - 2014-03-23 07:58 -0700
        Re: Question about Source Control Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-03-24 09:56 +1100
        Re: Question about Source Control Terry Reedy <tjreedy@udel.edu> - 2014-03-23 21:26 -0400
        Re: Question about Source Control Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2014-03-24 01:42 +0000
        Re: Question about Source Control Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-03-24 13:04 +1100
        Re: Question about Source Control Terry Reedy <tjreedy@udel.edu> - 2014-03-24 00:55 -0400
    Re: Question about Source Control Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-03-19 13:34 +1100

csiph-web