reminder: fx-team is the new (front-end) inbound

Gregory Szorc gps at
Fri Aug 2 17:47:40 UTC 2013

On 8/2/13 8:54 AM, Ehsan Akhgari wrote:
> On 2013-08-02 11:17 AM, Matt Brubeck wrote:
>> On 8/2/2013 6:56 AM, Gijs Kruitbosch wrote:
>>> And can I add something to that... We just had some sheriffs in
>>> #fx-team on IRC who asked for help with some conflicts in merging m-c
>>> (which had just had inbound merged in) to fx-team.
>>> When doing the merge, I noticed that some people (who shall remain
>>> nameless to protect the guilty) had pushed to both fx-team and m-i
>>> within ~1 day of each other, with conflicting patches.
>> In case this was the Metro team (I'm not certain it was), I'm sorry --
>> we just made the switch from inbound to fx-team yesterday, so we may
>> well have had patches outstanding on inbound at the time.  We probably
>> should have checked whether there were any pending merges that might
>> lead to conflicts.
> Merge conflicts will definitely happen more in the future, I don't think
> it's reasonable to expect everybody to have a mapping of what they (or
> others) have landed in which branch all the time.

Detecting code merge conflicts can be automated. Whether it can be done 
so in a manner that is efficient for everyone to continuously run 
remains to be seen.

One of the benefits of having a unified repository is that clients will 
possess all of this information locally and thus will more easily be 
able to identify merge conflicts.

I've filed a bug [1] against my mozext Mercurial extension to track 
implementing merge conflict detection. I'm optimistic it will be 
possible to detect at push/pull time. Worst case we can operate a 
service/command that the sheriffs or anyone can use to detect merge 
conflicts early, before things blow up at merge time.


More information about the firefox-dev mailing list