On 06/21/2012 12:30 PM, Ademar de Souza Reis Jr. wrote: > On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 10:54:12AM -0400, Chris Evich wrote: >> On 06/21/2012 10:40 AM, Lucas Meneghel Rodrigues wrote: >>> Hi guys, >>> >>> I ask your suggestions about release management. >>> >>> One thing that is proving to be a good decision was the creation of the >>> 'next' branch. We're able to control what's going to 'master' better >>> with it. But right now, we have our release tags referencing commits in >>> master: >>> >>> 0.14.0 -> commit in master >>> 0.14.1 -> commit in master >>> >>> So on and so forth... >>> >>> Now with Fedora packaging (and possibly other use cases), it is >>> necessary that we extend the life cycle of a release, by having release >>> based branches, say 0.14, and we would cherry pick fixes from master for >>> an extended period of time, so we can release 0.14.2, 0.14.3,... so on >>> and so forth. >>> >>> I'm inclined to go ahead and start doing it, but I'd like to hear your >>> opinion about it. >>> >>> Cheers, >>> >>> Lucas >> Lucas, >> >> Thanks, seeing this in writing helps :D >> >> Would we still have tags on master branch for releases, or just move >> releases to be all branch-based? i.e. >> >> master >> \ >> |--- 0.14.0 >> | \ >> | |---0.14.1 >> | \ >> | --- 0.14.2 >> \ >> --- 0.15.0 >> \ >> --- 0.15.1 >> > Hello. > > My understanding is that it should be a branch for each "stable" > release. I'm not sure if we have such a policy stablished > already, but I would suggest this one: > > Version format: major.stable.minor > > - We're at major version 0 > - The "stable" (for lack of a better term) is 14 > - The minor (bugfix) is 1
^ My original question is in much better context here: is a minor release supposed to be bugfix only? AFAIK, this has not been the case so far. > > So, showing branches + tags: > > master > \ > |... > |----0.13 (branch) > | \---- 0.13.0-rc1 (tag) > | |---- 0.13.0 (tag) > | |---- 0.13.1 ... > | |---- 0.13.n > |----0.14 > | \---- 0.14.0-rc1 > | |---- 0.14.0 > | |---- 0.14.1 > | |---- 0.14.2 > ... > > We never tag the master branch. Releases would be made from the > stable branches. We would also commit to not break a minor > release, it should include only bugfixes. As of now, the master branch is tagged for releases, and a release has been made out of master at a given point in time (that is, no branch for stabilization or something like that). BTW, IMHO a branch for stabilization is less necessary now that we have 'next'. > > Fedora would probably like to stick to a stable branch during the > lifetime of the distro. Ditto for our external users who are > concerned with stability. +1 > > This kind of release management is a must if we support > out-of-the tree tests. > > Cheers > - Ademar > > >> or both, >> >> master (tags: 0.14, 0.15, ...) >> \ >> |--- 0.14.0 >> | \ >> | |---0.14.1 >> | \ >> | --- 0.14.2 >> \ >> --- 0.15.0 >> \ >> --- 0.15.1 >> >> ? >> >> Using branches get's us automatic tarball'ing on github, no? What would >> using tags off master buy us? Would it help in case we need to port a >> fix from 0.15 based master tag to 0.14.x branch? >> _______________________________________________ Autotest mailing list Autotest@test.kernel.org http://test.kernel.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/autotest
