Did we have a branching policy discussion? I recall we decided not to do too much in the trunk. In any case, I think your suggestion works, barring any other opinions. I was thinking of creating a "2.2.1" branch first, and then applying patches to that, but assuming there wasn't anything big done in the 2.2.0 branch I think it comes to the same ends. I was going to do that this afternoon, but if someone were to get there first I wouldn't complain...
Cheers, Greg. On Wed, 2013-04-03 at 10:45, Dennis Reedy wrote: > On Apr 3, 2013, at 1030AM, Greg Trasuk wrote: > > > Hi Dennis: > > > > I think the suggestion was that we do a release branched off the 2.2.0 > > release with a bare set of patches moved over - primarily the Logging > > fix and I think there was a change to one of the JRMP context classes > > that I needed for the Surrogate container. And then a release from the > > qa_refactor branch a little bit later. > > Okay, sounds good. Just some logistic first. From the branching policy > discussion; Seems we should do the work in the 2.2 branch, then when ready to > release tag it as 2.2.1 correct? >
