Christopher Baines writes: [cc: Efraim]
> Janneke Nieuwenhuizen <jann...@gnu.org> writes: > >> Maxim Cournoyer writes: >> >>> Sorry for reviving a 14 weeks old thread, I'm still catching up >>> post-move :-). >> >> Ah that explains why I missed this... >> >>> Christopher Baines <m...@cbaines.net> writes: [..] >> We've been seeing a regular stream of `squash' commits fixing our and >> eachother's patches and I'm keeping `core-packages-team' rebased >> regularly and hope that we don't need to merge it once it's ready, but >> can just push the final rebase. > > I think what you're doing is fine. the only thing I'd suggest to change > is regarding branch naming. This isn't documented, but > data.qa.guix.gnu.org (and QA) ignore branches where the name begins with > wip-. > > So if as you say this branch is currently being worked on, but not quite > ready to be merged, then I'd suggest naming it as wip-core-packages-team > (or anything else beginning with wip-). That way, the data service will > ignore it and can spend it's time looking at other branches/patch > series. Thanks, that's good to know/be reminded of. However...this advise comes a bit [too] late as I believe it's about time the build farm would have a look at `core-packages-team', WYDT Efraim?. So if `core-packages-team' is already being built, where can I see/use the result[s] of that? Up till now I've been doing all builds myself and haven't seen any substitutes? Greetings, Janneke -- Janneke Nieuwenhuizen <jann...@gnu.org> | GNU LilyPond https://LilyPond.org Freelance IT https://www.JoyOfSource.com | Avatar® https://AvatarAcademy.com
