[Pulp-list] [devel] 2.5.x branches

[Randy Barlow]

On 09/09/2014 08:04 AM, Ivan Necas wrote:
> This sound like a lot of merging.

It is, but it will also be very infrequent as we are doing little to no
work on 2.4 in the medium and long term.

> How one figures out what should go to the master and what to 2.5?

At this point, 2.5 is feature frozen so all features go into master.
Bugs that have their target release set to 2.5.0 go into 2.5-testing,
and bugs that have their target release set to 2.5.1 go into 2.5-dev.

> Any reason why keeping that many branches in place? I'm might miss something,
> but creating a branch per release, once the release is more or less feature
> complete and cherry-picking additional fixes to it seem more natural to me.

That is certainly one way to do it, but this way makes it easier to
avoid assumptions that we may have about the code state that were valid
for master but not for the past releases. Branching from the oldest
release that needs the fix makes it easier to work in the context of the
code that first needs the fix.

> What about the other cases, where something get's fixed in 2.5-dev first
> and additionally decided it should go back to 2.4-testing as well.

If this happens, cherry picking is what we will do. It is rare, but
possible.

> I'm of course not core Pulp developer, but I think having more simpler branching
> schema makes it easier for semi-end users to figure out what's going on.

Perhaps better documenting this would make it nicer. I've considered a
visual representation that might explain things more easily.

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 819 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/pulp-list/attachments/20140909/df3929fc/attachment.sig>