2011/6/21 Krzysztof Kosiński <tweenk.pl@...400...>:
2011/6/22 Josh Andler <scislac@...400...>:
This may mean we may end up with a 3rd branch for experimental features (where devs want things tested as they're writing), or that aren't otherwise in good enough shape for trunk. So, it may end up looking like "stable", "trunk", & "experimental" to still achieve continuous development.
I don't think this is a good idea. As soon as several features are merged in experimental, all in various states of "readiness", the experimental will transform into the trunk, trunk will become quasi-stable, and stable will become "nobody works on this any more". Merging a specific feature from experimental would be tedious (you have to find all commits related to it).
This is definitely a fear of mine and why I wanted people to discuss it. So, just change the rule from "don't break trunk" to "don't commit until a feature is pretty much done and in need of wider testing so it can get polish"? It includes the original rule and prevents the pieces of a feature stuff we've suffered from. Basically, it will just impose better practices on our contributors. Any other suggestions or thoughts?
Cheers, Josh