[petsc-dev] broken nightlybuilds (next vs next-tmp)

[Smith, Barry F.]

  Let's please all stop wasting time arguing about next! We can argue when there is something to argue about. Not now.



> On Nov 11, 2017, at 3:27 PM, Balay, Satish <balay at mcs.anl.gov> wrote:
> 
> On Sat, 11 Nov 2017, Jed Brown wrote:
> 
>> Removing next without a reliable substitute that ensures quality control
>> would be a disaster for the stability of 'master', and thus for everyone
>> trying to develop new features.  That's what we had before switching to
>> Git and it was a mess.
> 
> Sorry if I gave you the impression that what was discussed was going
> back to our old (master-only) model.
> 
> The initial reference [one liner] didn't have details - so it was
> perhaps misleading.
> 
> But in my subsequent e-mails - I've explained one way of interpreting
> it reference to stuff like - for eg: [copy/paste from prior e-mail]
> 
>>>>>>> .
> Also if feature-1 and feature-2 are feature branches that are tested
> in next [wrt integration]. The following should be equivalent to
> testing 'master + feature1 + feature2' - aka current next model:
> 
> 1. test master+feature1
> 2. success => merge feature1 to master
> 3. tests master+ feature2
> 3. success => merge feature2 to master
> <<<<<<<
> 
> Satish