[Bf-committers] RFC: "Continuous integration" branch?

Campbell Barton ideasman42 at gmail.com
Fri Mar 6 09:56:11 CET 2015

On Fri, Mar 6, 2015 at 7:48 PM, Bastien Montagne <montagne29 at wanadoo.fr> wrote:
> Hi,
> I’m not fan at all of a 'global staging' branch idea, afaik gooseberry
> was supposed to be that… What I mean is, I think it will always diverge
> one way or the other. We could make per-patch staging branches, but
> would add some noise in our git repo…
> I really prefer storing such things locally. That way, each dev can
> handle things under his responsibility the way he prefers (local
> branches of course, but maybe also mere list of patches to apply, or
> whatever). "Public" branches should be kept for reasonably big projects,
> or sensitive things that need early testing/team work/whatever, imho.

The problem with storing things locally is...

- Its not clear to the patch submitter what happened.
- We rely on each devs hard-disk/backups... or knowing the URL of
their github repo.
- Another dev can't easily apply the patch (or wont have access to any
improvements made after applying).

More information about the Bf-committers mailing list