Possible downside to PQM or ChangeIntegrator?

[Aaron Bentley]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Nicholas Allen wrote:
> But this also brings up a possible problem with PQM. If it decides that
> it will not merge a request from a developer (eg does not compile) it
> then informs the developer but what if the developer has already made
> unrelated changes in his branch by this time?

One option is to branch after the fact, and only when needed.

$ bzr pqm-submit -m "merge frob changes"
# Hack, hack on brof
$ bzr commit -m "Starting work on brof"
# PQM complains
$ bzr branch . -r -2 ../fixes
$ cd ../fixes
# Fix PQM complaints
$ bzr commit -m "Fixed from problem"
$ bzr pqm-submit -m "merge frob changes"

Another option would be to have a permanent "fixes" branch.

# PQM complains
$ cd ../fixes
$ bzr pull --overwrite ../develbranch -r -2
# Fix PQM complaints
...

Or similarly, you could have a "pending" branch:
$ bzr push ../pending
$ cd ../pending
$ bzr pqm-submit -m "merge frob changes"
$ cd ../develbranch
# Hack, hack on brof
$ bzr commit -m "Starting work on brof"
# PQM complains
$ cd ../pending
# Fix PQM complaints
$ bzr commit -m "Fixed from problem"
$ bzr pqm-submit -m "merge frob changes"

Personally, I like having feature branches.  But I do have a "bzr.ab"
branch, for changes that only need one or two commits.

Aaron
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFFQhH50F+nu1YWqI0RAuerAJ9uzuu3C+hpvSkvZx6GuEZn5G9jKwCbBAHv
59qTHYDv5HE0VMQHVO/XMG4=
=MZSh
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----