I'm OK with rebasing master after releases for the next couple releases, and we'll see how it goes (though I had always thought force pushing upstream master was a faux pas). There could be situations where we don't want to include all commits in the next release candidate when a vote fails:
rcX c1 c2 c3 <-- only need this commit c4 c5 rc{X+ 1} This is purely hypothetical, so we can cross this bridge when we come to it. Thanks Wes On Fri, May 5, 2017 at 12:51 PM, Julian Hyde <jh...@apache.org> wrote: > I’m fine with either proposal (holding off commits during the release > vote, or rebasing master afterwards). > > I agree with Julien that it’s really nice to have a simple, linear history > (with releases on the master branch) and since Arrow is a fairly low-volume > project we’re lucky we can do that. > > We’re in a similar situation in Calcite, and have arrived at a similar > policy, where we tend to close master during the release quiet period. I > will often continue to process pull-requests; I stack them in a personal > branch called “next-master” and commit them all to master when master > re-opens for commits. > > Julian > > > > On May 5, 2017, at 9:42 AM, Julien Le Dem <jul...@dremio.com> wrote: > > > > Alternatively we can rebase master on the release if patch have been > merged > > concurently to the release vote. > > I think it is fine to rebase commits that have not been released yet. > > (the release sha however must stay the same) > > I find usefull to have the release tag in the master history to know byt > > looking at the git log if a given patch was before or after a release. > Even > > if this info is duplicated somewhere else (jira) this one is the source > of > > truth. > > > > On Fri, May 5, 2017 at 7:18 AM, Wes McKinney <wesmck...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > >> For the first few releases, we've been holding off merging patches to > >> master while the release vote is in progress, partially because of the > >> commits that the maven-release-plugin commits. > >> > >> I would propose that in the future we continue to merge patches and > perform > >> the release tag in a branch (so the release tag itself won't appear in > the > >> master timeline) so that development flow is not interrupted. I'm not > >> familiar with what other projects having Java libraries do, so let me > know > >> if there's a preferred workflow. > >> > >> Thanks > >> Wes > >> > > > > > > > > -- > > Julien > >