No mails on merges. Can we have them?
kehoea at parhasard.net
Thu May 13 11:29:21 EDT 2010
Ar an ceathrú lá déag de mí Bealtaine, scríobh Stephen J. Turnbull:
> Mats Lidell writes:
> > It is enough if the the buildbot gets the mail. No need to bore the
> > list if that is what merge will do.
> > (I thought merges would be interesting since, at least non trivial
> > ones, could get wrong!? And announcing that there is new stuff to pull
> > would also be interesting not only for buildbots!? But I guess I'm
> > missing something here.)
> No, merges are totally boring, at least in theory.
Not in practice; cf.
http://email@example.com , and I dealt
with something similar reported by Vin in the last six months, which I’m
having more trouble finding in my archives.
> Here's why: a merge will only occur in practice if somebody has made a
> commit not yet in the tree. That commit will be reported to the list and
> trigger the buildbot. But what will the buildbot pull? I assume it pulls
> tip, which by the time the bot receives the trigger mail, tip will
> include the merge. (*Maybe* there's a race condition here, but I doubt it
> because the mailbot collects all the commits before sending any AIUI.)
I don’t know what the buildbot pulls. Mats?
> Note that unless you use push -f, every concurrent commit will imply a
> merge, as well, so we're covered in that direction too.
“Apart from the nine-banded armadillo, man is the only natural host of
Mycobacterium leprae, although it can be grown in the footpads of mice.”
-- Kumar & Clark, Clinical Medicine, summarising improbable leprosy research
More information about the XEmacs-Beta