[Yt-dev] proposition to close svn-trunk to active development

[Matthew Turk]

We have this: http://yt.enzotools.org/wiki/HackingGuidelines but it
could use some TLC.

On Wed, Mar 17, 2010 at 12:48 PM, Britton Smith <brittonsmith at gmail.com> wrote:
> That's not a bad idea.  Even just a development guidelines page might be
> nice.
>
> Britton
>
> On Wed, Mar 17, 2010 at 1:20 PM, Matthew Turk <matthewturk at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> I'm on board, too.  Trunk should be stable, and a staging ground for
>> pushing into a release.  hg can be unstable.  I know I broke this
>> policy only hours ago, but I think before a big push back to trunk, we
>> should ask for approval and get a second.  I don't mind handling most
>> of the merges, but in cases where someone has done a LOT of work, I'll
>> happily send out patches -- which is what I did with the last big
>> merge, a couple months ago.  For instance, when Stephen's structure
>> function goes in, I think he should be the one to 'svn ci' it.
>>
>> In the next release, which I think may not be very far off, we should
>> also document this in the proper docs.  I think adding a "How is yt
>> developed?" section to the docs would be good.
>>
>> -Matt
>>
>> On Wed, Mar 17, 2010 at 12:17 PM, j s oishi <jsoishi at gmail.com> wrote:
>> > Hi All,
>> >
>> > I heartily second this.
>> >
>> > j
>> >
>> > On Wed, Mar 17, 2010 at 12:10 PM, Britton Smith <brittonsmith at gmail.com>
>> > wrote:
>> >> Hi guys,
>> >>
>> >> It seems that most of yt development has migrated away from the
>> >> svn-trunk to
>> >> the various mercurial branches.  Like most of you guys, I imagine, I am
>> >> now
>> >> using the main hg branch of yt almost exclusively, since that's where
>> >> everything new that I need gets put right away.  It's rare, but every
>> >> now
>> >> and then something goes straight into the svn trunk without passing
>> >> through
>> >> hg.
>> >>
>> >> Just to make it official, I would like to propose that the svn-trunk
>> >> not be
>> >> used for any active development, but only a staging area for updates
>> >> coming
>> >> from the hg branch and destined for a release version.  This way, we
>> >> don't
>> >> run into the issue of having to merge changes in two directions between
>> >> svn
>> >> and hg, which I think is a bit of a pain.  I get the impression that
>> >> almost
>> >> all development is taking place in hg already, but I think it may be
>> >> beneficial to have an official policy on how this sort of thing should
>> >> be
>> >> done.
>> >>
>> >> Thoughts, anybody?
>> >>
>> >> Britton
>> >>
>> >> _______________________________________________
>> >> Yt-dev mailing list
>> >> Yt-dev at lists.spacepope.org
>> >> http://lists.spacepope.org/listinfo.cgi/yt-dev-spacepope.org
>> >>
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > --
>> > ----------------
>> > i am dot org: www.jsoishi.org
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > Yt-dev mailing list
>> > Yt-dev at lists.spacepope.org
>> > http://lists.spacepope.org/listinfo.cgi/yt-dev-spacepope.org
>> >
>> _______________________________________________
>> Yt-dev mailing list
>> Yt-dev at lists.spacepope.org
>> http://lists.spacepope.org/listinfo.cgi/yt-dev-spacepope.org
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Yt-dev mailing list
> Yt-dev at lists.spacepope.org
> http://lists.spacepope.org/listinfo.cgi/yt-dev-spacepope.org
>
>