Recipes vs. Looms vs. pipelines

[Barry Warsaw]

On Dec 15, 2009, at 11:15 AM, John Arbash Meinel wrote:

>I would mention that for packaging, I think you really do want to have
>'upstream' as the first thread, which doesn't work with the pipeline
>model, since a given branch can only participate in one pipeline.

Not just for packaging.  When I'm developing bug fix or feature branches, I
always like to have the devel branch as the bottom thread in my loom.  Note
too though that I want control over when I update the bottom thread
independently of when I update the devel branch.

This is something that feels more natural to me in looms than in pipelines.

>Which (IMO) is something that pushes for having a real DAG in the loom
>state, rather than just a stack model. As it means you can push *just
>this thread* into upstream, and have them merge it, without them having
>to merge all of your other changes. Otherwise the loom is just there to
>help you develop the patch. And then you throw away all the history once
>the patch gets applied to upstream.

I'm being more convinced of this as these discussions proceed.  Having a DAG
would, I think, resolve some of the trickier branches I've developed with
looms.  I agree with James that the ui is difficult though.

-Barry
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 835 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-distributed-devel/attachments/20091216/b1145364/attachment-0001.pgp