I am interested in your article..
How else to really do it then cherry picking.. but I guess h that also
depends where you do you're good first?
I always start at their lowest version I want to fix it and forward port
it, almost never do back ports
Op 10 sep. 2012 19:33 schreef "Carl-Eric Menzel" <[email protected]>
het volgende:

> +1 for B as well.
>
> We also need to think about how we will actually *do* the branching,
> and especially the merging. So far what I've seen were three totally
> separate branches with only cherry-picking going in between them. In my
> opinion, that's not a very good way to use git, which is far more
> powerful than that.
>
> I don't have time right now, but I hope to soon write a short article
> on how we do it in my current project, and offer that up for comments.
>
> Carl-Eric
>
> On Mon, 10 Sep 2012 09:05:20 -0700
> Igor Vaynberg <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > +1 for option B.
> >
> > -igor
> >
> > On Mon, Sep 10, 2012 at 5:31 AM, Martijn Dashorst
> > <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > We now live in a semver world and we need to agree on some basics:
> > > how we are going to maintain and release our software.
> > >
> > > From what I have heard from several folks in jira, mail, IRC and
> > > direct communication is that we have basically 2 camps:
> > >
> > > A. develop and release bug fixes until we we start developing for
> > > minor/major releases 6.1 (and 7.0).
> > >
> > > versus
> > >
> > > B. develop and release minor releases, only backporting critical
> > > bugs and releasing bug fix releases in case of critical bugs
> > >
> > > As we are following semver, both are valid strategies.
> > >
> > > Option A would require separate branches for 6.0.z, and 6.y
> > > Option B would require only branches 6.y.z when critical bugs are
> > > found—which should be rare.
> > >
> > > Option A would probably result in some releases like:
> > >  - 6.0.1, 6.0.2, 6.0.3, 6.1.0, 6.0.4, 6.1.1, 6.1.2, 6.1.3, 6.0.5,
> > > 6.2.0, 6.1.4
> > >
> > > Whereas option B should result in releases like:
> > >  - 6.1.0, 6.2.0, 6.3.0, 6.3.1, 6.4.0, 6.5.0, 6.4.1
> > >
> > > What do you think?
> > >
> > > Martijn
>
>

Reply via email to