[petsc-dev] does next model mess up our histories

[Jed Brown]

Satish Balay <balay at mcs.anl.gov> writes:

> On Thu, 2 Oct 2014, Jed Brown wrote:
>
>> Satish Balay <balay at mcs.anl.gov> writes:
>> > I think is ok to be a bit more messy in next. Sure there is a tradeoff
>> > - but you get better debugging in master :)
>> 
>> If bugs make it to 'master', the process has failed.
>
> If we have to do patch releases - the process has failed?

Of course.  Every bug is a failure of internal quality control.  It's
not possible to avoid bugs entirely, but we should strive to catch them
early.  I.e., saying that we won't worry about bugs in 'next' because we
can fix them in 'master' defeats the purpose of the workflow.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 818 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.mcs.anl.gov/pipermail/petsc-dev/attachments/20141002/3cd17a87/attachment.sig>