On Thu, Nov 07, 2019 at 23:43:25 +0000, Chris Hassell wrote:
> I did some code reviews and then pulled ... but the changes ended up on
> master.
>
> Given master is *mostly* dead... I've carted them without fanfare over to 3_5.
>
>
> 1) Are we willing to go and create 3_6 or 3_5_1?
>
> 2) Is there a better way to re-apply/distribute pull requests
> when they merge cleanly on another important branch?
This doesn't answer your main question, but on the topic of branch
names: I assume we would NOT want to name any branch "3_5_1", since
3.5.1 is already released and these new patches are on top of the code
at that point in time, (presumably) building toward a 3.5.2 release -- I
don't see why that activity wouldn't just happen on the existing 3_5
branch....
When you say master is "mostly dead", do you mean "it hasn't had any
activity in a long time" or "it is full of significant changes which no
one still around understands, and thus probably we should ignore/abandon
those changes and go back to the existing 3.5.x codebase" ?
Nathan
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Nathan Stratton Treadway - [email protected] - Mid-Atlantic region
Ray Ontko & Co. - Software consulting services - http://www.ontko.com/
GPG Key: http://www.ontko.com/~nathanst/gpg_key.txt ID: 1023D/ECFB6239
Key fingerprint = 6AD8 485E 20B9 5C71 231C 0C32 15F3 ADCD ECFB 6239
