Re: PostgreSQL Developer meeting minutes up

Aidan Van Dyk wrote:
> * Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> [090605 13:55]:
>
>
>> Yeah, a requirement to work from the back branch forward is quite
>> unacceptable IMNSHO. It's also quite unreasonable. The tool is there to
>> help, not to force an unnatural work pattern on us.
>>
>
> Again, just to make it clear, git isn't going to *force* anyone to
> drastically change their workflow.

My reaction was against someone saying in effect "don't work that way,
work this way".

So make your argument to that person ;-)

[...]
> I have a feeling that as people (specifically the comitters) get slowly
> introduced and exposed to some of the more advanced things git lets you
> do, and as you get comfortable with using it, people will *want* to
> start altering how they do thing, simply because they start to find out
> that git really allows them to do what they really want, rather than
> what they have "thought they want" because they've been so brainwashed
> by CVS...
>
>
>

The whole point is that we want something better *that suits our work
patterns*. Almost all the backpatching that gets done is by the
committers. So we have a bunch of concerns that are not relevant to that
vast majority of developers. In particular, it would be nice to be able
to make a bunch of changes on different branches and then commit it all
in one hit. If that's possible, then well and good. If it's not, that's
a pity.

cheers

andrew