| |||||||||||||
Project flowProject flowPosted Sep 14, 2008 13:10 UTC (Sun) by mingo (subscriber, #31122)In reply to: Project flow by man_ls Parent article: Tightening the merge window rules It has taken decades for a few people to value constant stability, and even so most of the world isn't there yet. So it is not strange that it should take a couple of years to get used to such a process. Yes, and even for the kernel it has taken almost a decade to reach that state. (Btw., the technological trigger was Git - it enabled the new, distributed, "evolving" workflow.) So shouting at folks for not getting it right would be rather hypocritical, and in practice upstream is rather flexible about it all. The comment i replied to claimed that there was a problem with the kernel's development process. I disagree with that, and i think it's natural to expect that if some code wants to reach upstream ASAP it should try to follow and adopt to its development flow. I.e. new projects should 'become upstream' well before they touch upstream (they should adopt similar principles) - that way there will be a lot less friction after the merge point as well.
(Log in to post comments)
|
|||||||||||||