Flagging stable patches

Dirkjan Ochtman dirkjan at ochtman.nl
Mon Jul 13 09:21:29 CDT 2009

On Mon, Jul 13, 2009 at 15:29, Martin Geisler<mg at lazybytes.net> wrote:
> I think there has been some confusion (at least from my side) about just
> what should go into crew-stable and what should go into crew.
> It used to be so that only *important bugfixes* went into crew-stable
> and everything else went into crew. It was rare that stuff got into
> crew-stable and I didn't even have a crew-stable clone on my machine for
> a long time.
> But after 1.3, Matt has indicated that the defaults have changed. As I
> understand it, we now push *straight-forward bugfixes* to crew-stable
> and everything else to crew. In that way, crew-stable is in perpetual
> feature freeze.

AFAIK, that has always been the case.

> I actually like this and think it's important to get bugfixes of all
> kinds out sooner. I have just been slow to get used to the new policy.
> I guess that also means that I can base mercurial-i18n on stable since
> that repository will see more updates now? But then the "big
> re-wrapping" patch should have gone into crew, otherwise translators
> will only see it shortly before the next major release :-/

I think you're going to need two i18n repositories, unless you want
translators to translate all the new strings during the feature

> Perhaps we should begin a new practice and push just once from hg to
> hg-stable and do it earlier, say 2-3 weeks before the release. That will
> automatically mark the beginning of the feature freeze since no new
> features to into hg-stable.

Pushed just once now, just after the release. Matt forgot about doing
it at the point of feature freeze, but we'll surely do that again for
the next release (I think he has indicated as much).



More information about the Mercurial-devel mailing list