|
From: | Simon Thum |
Subject: | Re: [O] [DEV] New git workflow |
Date: | Wed, 21 Mar 2012 09:46:49 +0100 |
User-agent: | Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:10.0.1) Gecko/20120304 Thunderbird/10.0.1 |
Hi Achim, On 03/20/2012 11:27 PM, Achim Gratz wrote:
Sorry, but cherry-picking into multiple release branches would simply not be a sane development model for a small project like orgmode.
I just wanted to make sure it's considered.Whether multiple branches are involved depends mainly on what releases one intends to maintain. The nice thing in the model is the gradual maintenance: A really critical fix could see more backports than a nicety.
I guess a decision should mostly be based on how significant the use case "back-port fix" is to org-mode. The "safer master" role of maint could of course be retained in a stable branch which points to something like address@hidden month ago}.Any point in the past is no safer than today's master. The stability that maint should provide to users is with regards to the feature set, i.e. no gratuitous changes between releases.
Ooops, I just wanted to illustrate that "stable" is typically behind master - ultimately it should be a concious decision what is "stable".
I like the goal maint is set to achieve, I'm just not convinced regular merges are a good way to ensure it - after all, merges include everything in a branch. If there are no doubts about that on your side, I'm fine.
Cheers, Simon
[Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread] |