develooper Front page | perl.perl5.porters | Postings from February 2020

Re: The great dead-branch prune part 1

Thread Previous | Thread Next
From:
demerphq
Date:
February 10, 2020 06:02
Subject:
Re: The great dead-branch prune part 1
Message ID:
CANgJU+WwtHHPn4L8oWfHitKKdXBCrGytxME5T6GmENf1yvfzXw@mail.gmail.com
On Mon, 10 Feb 2020, 11:34 , <hv@crypt.org> wrote:

> demerphq <demerphq@gmail.com> wrote:
> :Good question. I was going to add breakdowns by date to my report tool so
> :we have some structured data to have that conversation. I think also
> :testing whether the branch is rebasable is also a good test. If it
> produces
> :massive conflicts and it's fairly old it's a strong signal that the branch
> :probably should be deleted. Maybe anything that old is going to conflict
> so
> :much that it won't help.
>
> I think age is much more relevant. The more (possibly useful) work there
> is in a branch, the more likely it is not to be rebasable, so that doesn't
> seem like an ideal criterion to decide it is ripe for deletion.
>

I generally agree. I think however it's important to make a distinction
between "ripe for deletion" and "should be automatically deleted".

I think any of "maybe" and "keep" categories need manual review before
deletion. The "shoulds" imo should be automatically deleted by some kind of
script as it's kinda a PITA to do the review manually. Which is why I put
together the script I did.

Yves

>

Thread Previous | Thread Next


nntp.perl.org: Perl Programming lists via nntp and http.
Comments to Ask Bjørn Hansen at ask@perl.org | Group listing | About