Re: Next release from master

[Óscar Fuentes]

Daniel Colascione <address@hidden> writes:

> I see no need for such caution on the master branch. It's just as easy
> to revert a broken feature as it is to add one in the first place. I'm
> in favor of developing directly on master.

Apparently you skipped a previous message of mine where I mention a case
of a commit that rendered a package useless for many months and was not
possible to revert it.

Mixing unrelated commits on a linear sequence makes difficult to revert
invasive features, review code and pinpoint regressions (bisecting only
tells you that a bug is repeatable starting from certain commit, not
that the commit introduced the bug; having the entire series of commits
that implemented a feature nicely isolated on their own branch of the VC
DAG makes analysis much easier, for all purposes.)

For one-off changes that fits logically on a single commit, yes, master
is fine.