Update on git conversion

[Stefan (metze) Metzmacher]

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

Gerald (Jerry) Carter schrieb:
> 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.

sounds good to me.

metze

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with SUSE - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFHBjwlm70gjA5TCD8RAglAAJ9OqFwfbdV0n64YQ8bmhMEQK9MVUwCZASI6
imCfhYdAlLAD42YDsxwewFk=
=epCf
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----