Yes, that's what I mean. 3.9 is "current" - it should track latest changes. 3.8 is "stable" - it should only get critical fixes.
Patrick On Wed, Mar 20, 2024 at 1:50 PM Andor Molnar <an...@apache.org> wrote: > Do you mean handle 3.9 and 3.8 slightly differently and be more strict > on branch-3.8? > > I can agree with that, but 3.9 can still receive more patches. > > Andor > > > > > On Wed, 2024-03-20 at 13:16 -0700, Patrick Hunt wrote: > > Shouldn't we only backport critical fixes into the non-mainline > > branch? The > > whole idea is that that's the "stable" release while the mainline is > > the > > most current... > > > > Regards, > > > > Patrick > > > > On Wed, Mar 20, 2024 at 12:54 PM Andor Molnar <an...@apache.org> > > wrote: > > > > > Hi ZK committers, > > > > > > I've come across recently that patch authors keep asking me to > > > backport > > > their patches to active branches, because it was only submitted to > > > the > > > master branch. > > > > > > I think we should get into the habit of submitting every accepted > > > PRs > > > to all active branches (today it's branch-3.8 and branch-3.9) > > > unless > > > it's explicitly asked otherwise. > > > > > > For example, in case of a big new feature which requires a major > > > version upgrade, we should not do that automatically, but for > > > everything else, like bug fixes, improvements, code cleanups, doc > > > updates, etc. feel free and submit everywhere. > > > > > > If we don't do that, we'll end up not shipping anything in minor > > > releases. > > > > > > What do you think? > > > > > > Regards, > > > Andor > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
