+1 to have a separate branch for 2.0 and keeping master clean from breaking changes. I think 2.0 should be merged to master only after first 2.0 release, when it really becomes the main development branch.
2016-12-07 12:36 GMT+03:00 Sergi Vladykin <[email protected]>: > I think it is good idea to be able to continue releasing 1.X versions. It > may take quite some time to make Ignite 2.0 stable enough. Thus I'm for > keeping changes targeted exclusively to 2.0 in a separate branch for now. > > Sergi > > 2016-12-07 12:23 GMT+03:00 Vladimir Ozerov <[email protected]>: > > > Igniters, > > > > We are moving towards Apache Ignite 2.0. This release will contain lots > of > > changes which break compilation on user side and change internal binary > > protocols. The question is - where to continue development of 2.0 > features? > > > > We can do that in master branch. But what if we decide to release Apache > > Ignite 1.9 at some point? In this case we cannot use master branch > because > > it will contain incompatible API changes. As alternative we can create > > separate branch for 2.0 and merge all breaking changes there. But it will > > complicate development process. > > > > Probably we can continue all development in *master*, and in case if we > > decide to release another 1.x release, then create branch from ignite-1.8 > > tag and cherry-pick required fixes there. > > > > Please share your thoughts. > > > > Vladimir. > > >
