Re: branching

[Han-Wen Nienhuys]

On Fri, Apr 15, 2011 at 11:29 AM, Graham Percival
<address@hidden> wrote:

>> The beauty of branching off is that nobody needs to hold off anything.
>>  You just continue to put stuff in master (2.15.0), and cherry-pick
>> whatever needs to go to 2.14.
>
> I am pessimistic about this, but let's ask for volunteers.  Who
> wants to cherry-pick stuff?
>
>
> The reason that I'm pessimistic is that we racked up a huge amount
> of "technical debt" (i.e. bugs) during 2.11 and the early phase of
> 2.13.  I'm concerned that if we don't have regular releases, the
> unstable branch is going to accumilate bugs.
>
> I am also too tired to fight over it right now, but I also think
> that this is the wrong model of branching.  There's basically two
> ways:
> 1. keep master in a "ready-to-release" mode at all times; any
> serious bug gets reverted or fixed ASAP.  Unstable development
> happens on separate branches, which are merged to master when
> they're ready.

We are doing this, with the ready-to-release criterion being the
regtest passing.  I propose we stick to this schema.

My proposal is that "ready-to-release" still is not strict enough for
stable, so 2.14 version should be coming from something which moves
slower than the master branch.

-- 
Han-Wen Nienhuys - address@hidden - http://www.xs4all.nl/~hanwen