On Mon, Jul 10, 2017 at 04:35:25PM -0700, Stefan Beller wrote: > Junio wrote in "What's-cooking": > > > ... I do not know how well they are tested > > in the field by people using 'master' in their everyday workflow. > > Ideally, our release process wants to see more people using 'next' > > in their everyday workflow to keep 'master' more stable than any > > tagged release, but I do not have a good idea on how to encourage > > it more than we currently do. > > Our internal release of git @ Google is debian experimental, > which is basically the 'next' branch + this patch + another patch. > > AFAICT It is a resend of > https://public-inbox.org/git/20120308122105.GA1562@burratino/ > > As Jonathan is a Debian Developer, it is easy for us to base > our internal version onto debian experimental, but long term we may > want to base our internal version on the original next. :) > To do so, upstream this one last meaningful patch. > > The 'another patch' from above is changing and hardcoding > the version number, which we do not want to upstream. Thanks for sending this in. I had wanted to do so myself so I could easily automate building Git packages based on the Debian packaging, but I never got around to it. -- brian m. carlson / brian with sandals: Houston, Texas, US https://www.crustytoothpaste.net/~bmc | My opinion only OpenPGP: https://keybase.io/bk2204
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
