From: | Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net> |
---|---|
To: | Dave Page <dpage(at)pgadmin(dot)org> |
Cc: | Guillaume Lelarge <guillaume(at)lelarge(dot)info>, pgadmin-hackers <pgadmin-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: About our GSoC projects |
Date: | 2010-08-18 08:32:05 |
Message-ID: | AANLkTinwOfLSjBnQtGX-Xru7DWsDS2cW-07nBOJ5ov4=@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgadmin-hackers |
On Wed, Aug 18, 2010 at 10:25, Dave Page <dpage(at)pgadmin(dot)org> wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 18, 2010 at 9:20 AM, Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net> wrote:
>
>> You are supposed to work by having one "his branch" on his repo and
>> one "gleus branch" on your repo. Then you merge with his, and if you
>> make changes, he merges with yours, back and forth until you agree on
>> something that's good. At that point, you merge this (with squash,
>> please :P) into the main repository and push that.
>
> That seems like a nice way to waste a lot of time.
That really depends on the workflow. It can be pretty darn efficient,
particularly if you work with semi-working features.
But it does take a different mindset - if you work on it with the
traditional mindset, it's indeed a huge waste of time.
>>> If I understood correctly, yeah, I would like that to happen. The
>>> sooner, the better. I don't really know if we should use the same
>>> account or a different one. I actually don't care.
>>
>> Dave, any comment on that?
>
> The same account seems fine to me.
Ok. I'll look into that then.
--
Magnus Hagander
Me: http://www.hagander.net/
Work: http://www.redpill-linpro.com/
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Guillaume Lelarge | 2010-08-18 08:37:20 | Re: About our GSoC projects |
Previous Message | Dave Page | 2010-08-18 08:25:20 | Re: About our GSoC projects |