Hi 2012/3/30 Pierre Joye <pierre....@gmail.com>: > hi, > > On Fri, Mar 30, 2012 at 10:22 AM, Yasuo Ohgaki <yohg...@ohgaki.net> wrote: > >> Bug fix can be merged upwards. However, >> Are we free to merge feature changes? > > > Generally speaking, no.
I thought so. > >> Adding new module constant is new feature. > > Not necessary, for example in Curl or openssl, many constants addition > do not change the implementation per se. But it has to be discussed > from a case by case basis. > >> Before git, we just commit new feature/changes >> to trunk and we could think/argue about merge >> later. Now we need to think/argue about merge, >> then commit. > > Right, and that's actually very good. The commit first then try to > discuss is finally over. For large changes, discussing first is good. For small changes like this, it may be too much. > >> We need some guidelines for feature changes, >> if we are going to keep "merge upward" policy. > >> Anyway, RM of 5.3/5.4 are okay to add module >> constants to pgsql? If there is no objection, I'll >> commit the change and updates docs. > > RMs apply the developers decisions, in general. So please post your > proposals to the list, CCing them :) https://gist.github.com/2250214 The change is simple one. Just making constants available defined in pg-config.h The only reason why I've made this thread for this simple change is "merge upward" policy. Someone suggested gitflow, the flow would be better for faster development. -- Yasuo Ohgaki yohg...@ohgaki.net -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
