A big yay from me as long as this doesn't violate Apache rules, and merging unexpected release blockers between the two branches won't be too much work.
-Murtadha > On Sep 27, 2015, at 11:31 PM, Chris Hillery <[email protected]> wrote: > > There are a lot of changes that are stacking up in Asterix because we're > trying to get a release done. I'm thinking it might be a good exercise and > preparation for next time if we branched Asterix master for the release and > started allowing changes to be merged that are for post-release, instead of > basically having a code freeze which has been going on for, what, several > months already? > > We could either create a release branch off master and do the necessary > release cleanup over there, or else create a "develop" branch from master > and start committing new changes there. Branching a release branch off > master probably would require fewer changes to our existing infrastructure. > Either way, once the release was complete, we'd merge the branch back onto > master and continue. > > Anyone say yay or nay? > > Ceej
