Re: dpkg development cycle
On Mon, 14 Jan 2008, Otavio Salvador wrote:
> > There are two possible options for the workings of the "stable" branch though
> > I want to point out:
> > 1) As you described commit everything to "master" and cherry pick the
> > changes to "stable" if wanted. (backports)
> > 2) Try to decide where to commit beforehand and commit small changes
> > directly to "stable" and then merge that to "master". (forwardports)
> > The latter generates more merge commits but less "duplicated" commits.
> > An example project that uses this model is git itself.
> Yes. And it does work much better. We 1 on parted and we're planning
> to move to 2 after 1.9 gets released since it makes our merging,
> releasing and changelog much clearer
Do you typically have entries in debian/changelog in your commits?
Because that's going to generate conflicts whatever solution you use.
Le best-seller français mis à jour pour Debian Etch :