Re: [picocontainer-dev] patches for *full* binding-annotation capability

Paul Hammant wrote:
>>> In this case, Konstantin has a potentially large change to merge
>>> back.  If I applied my change to trunk first, it will be quite hard
>>> for him.
>> 
>> It does not matter. The work is always the same. If you merge back
>> your changes first, he can merge all changes from your branch into
>> his own. If he merges back first, you can do the same.
> 
> Not strictly true -
> 
> Armed with the patch for reference, I have the option of
> reapplication (doing it from scratch again). 

You have this always. It's a simple svn diff.

> The learnings are not
> lost, it might be easier for me to redo feature afresh after
> Konstantin's merge back.  IntelliJ makes it easy to move impl and
> tests around together :)

Well, do svn merge for Konstantin's change (merging his branch into trunk) into your branch. It's quite the same.

>>>  He already has a moderate risk of not-completing his goal,
>>> it'll be worse if I go off in a divergent direction on trunk.
>>> If Konstantin is as respectful (he's a 'good egg') he'll take a look
>>> at the patch and suggest that its mergeable after his change, or
>>> before it, or accomotate the same changes in his branch (chasing the
>>> JasonsTestCase 'specification')
>> 
>> This task is much easier using the svn merge command as proposed
>> above. That gives even the possibility of an incremental merge i.e.
>> if Konstantin decides today to merge your branch, but cannot merge
>> back into trunk yet, he still may take quite easily all additional
>> changes until he is ready. With your single patch it is alway an
>> all-or-nothing.
> 
> Agree, there are many incremental strategies.

Definitely.

- Jörg

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from this list please visit:

    http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email