Update on git conversion
Gerald (Jerry) Carter
jerry at samba.org
Fri Oct 5 13:16:23 GMT 2007
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Stefan (metze) Metzmacher wrote:
> Gerald (Jerry) Carter schrieb:
>> Stefan (metze) Metzmacher wrote:
>>> I think in general we should have the all branches
>>> (-unstable,-test,-stable) in the build-farm.
>> That would be the best solution. But I believe Tridge
>> expressed concern about having too many branches
>> being built. Any suggestions on solving that?
> The stable branch should be no problem, as we would only
> rebuild when something changes, and I assume the commit rate
> would like currently in the _RELEASE branch, right?
I'm planning on a more on-going merge to -stable. Where
as with the _RELEASE branches it was basically rsync on
top of the old _RELEASE tree right before release time.
The -stable tree will most like be updated weekly (depending
on how hard people work).
> I'm not sure about the commit rate about your -test branch.
> Maybe it would be useful if you would be able to run
> git pull manually in the unpacked area, just before you
> want to merge -test to -stable, so that you can verify
> the patches from -test before merging them to -stable.
Sounds feasible. What about this type of update schedule?
* -unstable Same schedule as wel have for the svn updates
* -test Update unpacked once per day.
* -unstable Update once per week.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v184.108.40.206 (Darwin)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
More information about the samba-technical