Ok, good to hear! How about moving the new symbol inheritance stuff into such a feature branch until it's working? (See https://gitlab.com/kicad/code/kicad/issues/3658) I understand it would mean less testing, but in its current state it's impossible to test or work on anything else since kicad keeps crashing.
On Wed, Dec 11, 2019 at 4:26 PM Jon Evans <j...@craftyjon.com> wrote: > > We already have used temporary branches for major features in the past. I'm > sure we'll continue to do this (through gitlab merge requests) where it makes > sense - it's a lot of work to keep a feature branch in mergeable state. > > -Jon > > On Wed, Dec 11, 2019, 10:16 Jonatan Liljedahl <li...@kymatica.com> wrote: >> >> Good points. However, I still think it might make sense to have at >> least one more level of granularity, and use temporary branches for >> major changes etc. so that they can be tested before being merged into >> master. Simply, to make a merge request for big changes even if done >> by one of the core developers. Going back to the 5.1 branch just to >> have a non-crashing version of kicad is quite a leap. >> >> On Wed, Dec 11, 2019 at 3:41 PM Wayne Stambaugh <stambau...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > >> > We have discussed this before and given that very few users would ever >> > test the development branch(es), I'm not going to change our branching >> > policy. I don't think it's unfair to ask users who are aware that the >> > master branch (which is the KiCad development branch) is always in a >> > state of flux to deal with a bit of temporary instability in exchange >> > for some comprehensive testing of new features. Most users seem willing >> > to help with the testing in spite of some minor and sometimes some not >> > so minor inconveniences. I think have development branches would just >> > slow down how quickly new feature bugs would get fixed. >> > >> > Cheers, >> > >> > Wayne >> > >> > On 12/11/19 9:21 AM, Jonatan Liljedahl wrote: >> > > Hi, >> > > >> > > Perhaps it would make sense to adopt something like this? >> > > https://nvie.com/posts/a-successful-git-branching-model/#the-main-branches >> > > >> > > In short, all development happens on 'develop' branch and only when >> > > this is stable it's merged back to 'master'. One doesn't have to >> > > follow the above model strictly, for example a merge into master >> > > doesn't need to mean "new version to be released". >> > > >> > > Another nice thing is that stuff that are work in progress and not yet >> > > stable can live in a feature branch until it's stable enough to merge >> > > into 'develop'. (For example the new symbol inheritance stuff, which >> > > currently makes the master branch a bit unusable) >> > > >> > > Maybe some of this makes sense, and some not? Just some thoughts while >> > > trying to find a point in the master branch history that doesn't crash >> > > all the time :) >> > > >> > > Cheers >> > > >> > >> > _______________________________________________ >> > Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers >> > Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net >> > Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers >> > More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp >> >> >> >> -- >> /Jonatan >> http://kymatica.com >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers >> Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net >> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers >> More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp -- /Jonatan http://kymatica.com _______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
