On Sat, Nov 21, 2015 at 12:40 AM, Sam Ruby <ru...@intertwingly.net> wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 20, 2015 at 11:23 AM, Ross Gardler > <ross.gard...@microsoft.com> wrote: > > Good point. I should add to my comments that even a CTR project uses RTC > for non-committers. And that a release vote means that at least three > people have reviewed the code from (at least) an IP standpoint, if not from > a code quality standpoint. > > > > In other words, +1 > > > > However, RTC projects do not use a mix and that's the point of > contention here, some people feel it is suboptimal (I'm one, but others > disagree). The discussion is not whether CTR also uses RTC at points, I > believe that is a given. > > Let me be pedantic for a moment. While RTC projects that use > Subversion may disallow work in branches, even by committers; such a > restriction isn't even possible in Git -- even for non committers. > Not only isn't something you can forbid, it isn't even something that I could understand without reading your sentence three times. Git is all about branching. Forbidding branches is a non sequitur.
