[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Patching on stable?
From: |
Ben Abbott |
Subject: |
Re: Patching on stable? |
Date: |
Sat, 17 Mar 2012 17:37:52 -0400 |
On Mar 17, 2012, at 3:46 PM, Jordi GutiƩrrez Hermoso wrote:
> While I'm trying to get the rules clear, I would also like some
> clarification on what is appropriate for the stable branch, because
> I'm never sure.
>
> The following is obviously appropriate:
>
> * Regressions since past stable releases
> * Critical bugs (but is a crash always crtical?)
>
> The following is less clear:
>
> * Documentation fixes
> * Minor bugs (accuracy, incorrect results)
>
> The follow is never good for the stable branch:
>
> * Breaking ABI compatibility
> * Adding new functionality
> * Deprecating or removing functions.
>
> Could we have a clear document somewhere that addresses all these? I'm
> always trying to guess when is patching on stable acceptable or not.
> My current heuristic is, if I'm not certain it's a regression or a
> critical bug, I don't patch on stable without asking first. Is that
> how it should stay?
>
> - Jordi G. H.
Looks good to me. For the "less clear" I think we should avoid these as well.
Of course, specific examples can be discussed on the list.
Ben
- Patching on stable?, Jordi GutiƩrrez Hermoso, 2012/03/17
- Re: Patching on stable?,
Ben Abbott <=