so, looking at it from blocking-b2g flag and which repo pick up the fix point 
of view,

in short
leo+ = the fix will go into mozilla-b2g18_v1_1_0_hd & mozilla-b2g18
hd+ = the fix will go into only mozilla-b2g18_v1_1_0_hd

and similarly for Gaia
sound right?

Re,
Joe Cheng
--------------------
Mozilla Taiwan
Tel: +886-2-87861100 #365
[email protected]

On Jun 5, 2013, at 1:28 PM, Alex Keybl <[email protected]> wrote:

>> I propose we do the same for Gaia too
> 
> 
> John and I were of the same mind. Let's move forward with this for both Gecko 
> and Gaia.
> 
>> I will be working with Taipei devs to
>> come up an exact plan and exact set of hd+ bugs to work on.
> 
> 
> I think the only thing we still need to figure out is how to notify hd 
> engineers when there is a conflict (keyword, whiteboard, needinfo, etc).
> 
> -Alex
> 
> On Jun 4, 2013, at 5:39 PM, Tim Chien <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
>> On Tue, Jun 4, 2013 at 10:54 PM, Ryan VanderMeulen
>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> Hi all, as most of you have probably seen by now, we now have a b2g18 
>>> v1.1hd branch set up for the HD B2G port in development. The plan for this 
>>> tree is that it should exactly mirror b2g18 along with additional 
>>> blocking-b2g:hd+ patches landing on it.
>>> 
>>> To make life easier for those landing on b2g18, ensure that no patches miss 
>>> being uplifted, and to keep commit history more in sync between the 
>>> branches, I propose that *only* blocking-b2g:hd+ patches be manually landed 
>>> on the v1.1hd tree. The v1.1hd repo will be kept in sync with b2g18 via 
>>> regular branch merges. While I recognize that this does invite the 
>>> possibility of merge conflicts eventually rising, I think this is 
>>> worthwhile to try until we find it to be unworkable.
>>> 
>>> To be clear - when referring to b2g18 above, I am *ONLY* referring to the 
>>> hg-based Gecko repository 
>>> (hg.mozilla.org/releases/mozilla-b2g18_v1_1_0_hd), I am NOT referring to 
>>> the Git-based Gaia repository (v1.1.0hd branch). It is my understanding 
>>> that those uplifts will still need to be double-landed (CCing jhford to 
>>> confirm).
>>> 
>>> Does this plan make sense for everyone? Ultimately, it should make life 
>>> easier for people on the Gecko side of things and IMO it reduces the 
>>> chances of mistakes being made.
>> 
>> I propose we do the same for Gaia too; although Gaia is more likely to
>> be fall into a conflict state, as long as we don't slip the schedule,
>> the conflict here is bearable. I will be working with Taipei devs to
>> come up an exact plan and exact set of hd+ bugs to work on.
>> 
>> Who should make the final call here?
>> 
>> --
>> Tim Guan-tin Chien, Engineering Manager and Front-end Lead, Firefox
>> OS, Mozilla Corp. (Taiwan)
> 
> _______________________________________________
> dev-b2g mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-b2g

_______________________________________________
dev-b2g mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-b2g

Reply via email to