Front page | perl.perl5.porters |
Postings from January 2011
On Tue, Jan 04, 2011 at 07:24:09AM -0500, David Golden wrote:
> The gray zone might be a situation where substantial document cleanup,
> refactoring or revision was done in blead and *then* a factual error
> was found. It might sometimes be easier for maint to pull the
> refactoring commits and then the commit that fixed the error. But I'd
> leave that to the discretion of the maint manager to do or else just
> reject the whole thing. (Since I assume that we want minimal commits
> in maint -- e.g. a targeted error fix -- that aren't in blead).
I think the danger with that (indeed, with document patches generally) is
that it is easy to bring in bleed-only changes by mistake: i.e. where
something is fixed / changed in blead and the documentation updated to
reflect that. An older example would be docs updated to use 'my $_' in
sample code, which you wouldn't want to backport to 5.8.x, but which would
be easily overlooked if you were just pulling in large-scale doc
refactorings.
So I'm all in favour of minimal doc update rules.
--
Overhead, without any fuss, the stars were going out.
-- Arthur C Clarke
Thread Previous