Update on git conversion

[Gerald (Jerry) Carter]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

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
  now
* -test Update unpacked once per day.
* -unstable Update once per week.





cheers, jerry
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2.2 (Darwin)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFHBjkmIR7qMdg1EfYRAshWAJ9up2iyWKz9ly1abXtXA1atSx34igCg0S2t
N+yKatmqzn9VpiG5Gi2tQ5k=
=taV5
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----