Re: [maint] The GDB maintenance process

Richard Earnshaw
2003-02-20T18:32:48Z

> One thing GCC(4) and GDB are now is encouraging exprementation on
> branches development to always occure on branches cut from the the
> relevant repository. For GDB we've had both success stories but also
> disasters. With that in mind, and looking at the GCC / GDB success
> stories, I'd suggest the following guidelines:
>
> - branches shall post all commits
> They don't need approval but can be commented on.
>
> - branches shall to be focused
> The interps branch started out too large with too many changes - look at
> the size of the final commit compared to that branch at its peak. Much
> time was lost because the branch started with too much lint :-(
>
> - branches shall track mainline.
> This keeps the level of divergence under control. It also keeps the
> pressure on developers to push cleanups and other stuff into the mainline.

I think there's a few other ground-rules that ought to apply, particularly
with respect to the first point:

-Branches should have an owner.
The owner can set further policy for a branch, but may not change the
ground rules. In particular, they can set a policy for commits (be it
adding more reviewers or deciding who can commit).

-All commits to a branch must be covered by an assignment
This saves us from the situation where a branch might become contaminated.

R.