[torquedev] array_changes and NUMA

Glen Beane glen.beane at gmail.com
Tue Jun 8 15:22:29 MDT 2010

On Tue, Jun 8, 2010 at 5:16 PM, Garrick Staples <garrick at usc.edu> wrote:
>> Garrick,
>> I'm sorry I was not paying attention to my mail. We really need to wait
>> until 2.5 is released before NUMA is put into the trunk.
> Really, I never suggested that NUMA should be merged into trunk. It was the
> furthest thought from my mind.
> What am I suggesting is that you have a nightmare coming in the future when you
> do decide to merge NUMA into trunk. There are 2 reasons for this. The first is
> that there are massive, heaping gobs of non-NUMA changes in the NUMA branch
> (mostly formatting changes). The second is similar code development happening
> in trunk at the same time.
> If it were me working on the NUMA branch, I would only make NUMA-related
> changes in the NUMA branch. All other changes would be commited to trunk and
> then merged into NUMA.
> In summation, I don't think NUMA should be merged into trunk at this time.

Garrick is right,  this is a nightmare waiting to happen when all of
these branches need to get merged back into trunk.  Formatting changes
in a branch are a really bad idea and any branch that is going to be
merged back into trunk should be tracking the changes that are
happening in trunk and staying as synched as possible

More information about the torquedev mailing list