That sounds good to me.
One concern, though: it looks like recreating old releases requires that
all the participating repos (1) still exist, (2) have the same
name/location, and (3) still have the release tags. I'm not too worried
about (1) and (3), but I could see (2) happening if, e.g., a
I like the general idea. I especially like that you've included
instructions for repo managers like me who will likely forget everything
about git branch management and cherry picking between releases.
In the past, you've played the part of central reviewer for requests to
merge to the
I’ve added a draft of a new release process that takes the repository split
into account. The main difference is that there is no longer a single release
branch under central management; instead, there is a release branch for each
repository, and management responsibilities for package release
3 matches
Mail list logo
