That sounds really good!
Simple question : why not drop svn altogether ? git does a much better job, it's easier to follow, easier to fork
Also I think a really good thing would be a test suite, it would make it much easier to check that some pulled patch doesn't break anything, also it could be really useful for bug-fixing, having submission of a failing test and submission of a patch being two required steps for a fix inclusion in the source.
Topic: Development process straw-man - page 2. (Read 8403 times)
With Satoshi's blessing, and with great reluctance, I'm going to start doing more active project management for bitcoin.
Everybody please be patient with me; I've had a lot of project management experience at startups, but this is the first open source project of any size I've been involved with. Anyway, I've created an integration/staging tree at:
https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin
... and am proposing this for a development process:
Straw-man plan for Bitcoin development (open source vets, please slap me around and help make this better):
Developers work in their own trees, then submit pull requests when they think their feature is ready.
Requests get discussed (where? here in the bitcoin forums?) and if there's broad consensus they're a good thing, well written, match coding style, etc. then they're merged into the 'master' branch.
master branch is regularly built and tested (by who? need people willing to be quality assurance testers), and periodically pushed to the subversion repo to become the official, stable, released bitcoin.
We'll create feature branches if/when there are major new features being worked on by several people.
Discussion, feedback, etc, especially from people with experience leading or working on other open source projects, is very welcome.
Everybody please be patient with me; I've had a lot of project management experience at startups, but this is the first open source project of any size I've been involved with. Anyway, I've created an integration/staging tree at:
https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin
... and am proposing this for a development process:
Straw-man plan for Bitcoin development (open source vets, please slap me around and help make this better):
Developers work in their own trees, then submit pull requests when they think their feature is ready.
Requests get discussed (where? here in the bitcoin forums?) and if there's broad consensus they're a good thing, well written, match coding style, etc. then they're merged into the 'master' branch.
master branch is regularly built and tested (by who? need people willing to be quality assurance testers), and periodically pushed to the subversion repo to become the official, stable, released bitcoin.
We'll create feature branches if/when there are major new features being worked on by several people.
Discussion, feedback, etc, especially from people with experience leading or working on other open source projects, is very welcome.
Jump to: