[ckan-dev] Branching policy and standardizing on branch names

Thu Feb 10 13:43:33 UTC 2011

* [2011-02-10 13:02:33 +0000] Seb Bacon <seb.bacon at gmail.com> écrit:
] 
] Alternatively we could move towards a "continuous development" model
] where we have complete test coverage, fast automated test builds, easy
] deployment, feature flags and a "blame" functionality so that everyone
] can be confident and take responsibility for their own code.

This is more or less the direction we seem to be taking, but some
of the infrastructure is missing.

Also, I am very much more inclined towards a few simple happy-path
and obvious-error tests and then regression tests when bugs are 
found rather than trying to reach the holy grail of "complete
test coverage".

] Pros and cons of both approaches.  The problem with dictator model is
] bottleneck, things waiting around to be merged, becoming harder to
] merge with time, etc etc.  The benefit is building in code reviews.

Agree code review is important in any case. Also agree that bottlenecks
are bad.

] So far, I still find git easier to work with, but that is probably
] mainly about familiarity.

I think unless we start using very advanced or obscure features
hg and git are pretty much the same from my point of view. The
only real advantage mercurial has it is written in python so we
could actually use it directly in our code (an obvious use case
is version management of harvested metadata documents instead 
of shoving XML into the database) but that's not something that
we have really exploited at all yet.

Cheers,
-w
-- 
William Waites                <mailto:ww at styx.org>
http://river.styx.org/ww/        <sip:ww at styx.org>
F4B3 39BF E775 CF42 0BAB  3DF0 BE40 A6DF B06F FD45