Leo Famulari <l...@famulari.name> skribis: > On Fri, Jun 10, 2016 at 02:59:49PM +0200, Ludovic Courtès wrote: >> Leo Famulari <l...@famulari.name> skribis: >> > The merge will probably be messy... >> >> We should leave it to you, to minimize breakage. > > Okay, should I do it today or is core-updates frozen?
It’s OK if you do it today. :-) The branch is being built but it’s just the beginning. >> > Off-topic: A regular package and a grafted package on master, and an >> > updated version of the package on core-updates... this is getting very >> > complicated and we should try our best to avoid such tangled situations >> > in the future. >> >> Do you think it would help to delay such upgrades in ‘core-updates’ >> until the time where ‘core-updates’ is getting ready for merge? > > I don't know if there is a great solution; I think this is a really > perverse case. > > I think of core-updates as the place to put these sorts of changes. If > we were to decide to delay the changes, we'd all have our own private > core-updates forks, and then we'd probably duplicate work and forget > about things. What do you think? Sorry, I explained myself poorly. Here, we (1) grafted Expat in master, (2) upgraded Expat in core-updates, and (3) only after that did we merge master in core-updates, making the merge more troublesome, right? My question was whether we should swap (2) and (3). Thoughts? Ludo’.
