On Wed, Sep 16, 2015 at 9:38 AM, Rohit Yadav <rohit.ya...@shapeblue.com> wrote:
> 1. Only BLOCKER fixes to master. If there's something else that needs to > get in, it can be discussed with the RMs on a case-by-case basis. > > > -1 -ish > What you’re effectively saying is to freeze/block master from new changes > until 4.6.0 releases which could take anywhere from one week to many weeks. > In reality that may be undesirable and can contribute to loss of developer > productivity time. > agree and > > Few suggestions, though I’m not sure that best way to go forward: why not > create a 4.6 branch and merge it back when 4.6.0 releases? Alternatively, > create a development branch on which development can continue and we merge > it back to master when that branch is stable enough and 4.6.0 has released? > I don't feel we should create a developer branch, branching 4.6.0 now and fixing blockers there to merge them back to master as they are fixed seems the way to go to me. > > 2. Atleast one of the reviewers of a PR should do the actual tests. We do > not have good CI in place and travis just does simulator tests. > > > +1 some of us talking in the background to setup an automated QA system to > use existing marvin tests to do long running integration tests but other > than Travis or Jenkins (b.a.o) we don’t have anything. > I hate this but still +1 (CI is/should be there so we don't need this) -- Daan
