yes, basically the same thing. no issue in deleting the branch and re-creating, just semantics.
e. ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Allon Mureinik" <[email protected]> > To: "Eyal Edri" <[email protected]> > Cc: [email protected], "Antoni Segura Puimedon" <[email protected]>, "Oved > Ourfali" <[email protected]>, "Sandro > Tanaka" <[email protected]> > Sent: Monday, July 7, 2014 2:22:21 PM > Subject: Re: [ovirt-devel] ovirt-engine-3.5 branching > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Eyal Edri" <[email protected]> > > To: [email protected] > > Cc: "Antoni Segura Puimedon" <[email protected]>, "Allon Mureinik" > > <[email protected]>, "Oved Ourfali" > > <[email protected]>, "Sandro Tanaka" <[email protected]> > > Sent: Monday, July 7, 2014 10:50:41 AM > > Subject: Re: [ovirt-devel] ovirt-engine-3.5 branching > > > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > From: "Allon Mureinik" <[email protected]> > > > To: "Antoni Segura Puimedon" <[email protected]> > > > Cc: [email protected] > > > Sent: Sunday, July 6, 2014 11:20:13 AM > > > Subject: Re: [ovirt-devel] ovirt-engine-3.5 branching > > > > > > > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > > From: "Antoni Segura Puimedon" <[email protected]> > > > > To: [email protected] > > > > Sent: Thursday, July 3, 2014 8:27:18 PM > > > > Subject: Re: [ovirt-devel] ovirt-engine-3.5 branching > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > > > From: "Allon Mureinik" <[email protected]> > > > > > To: "Oved Ourfali" <[email protected]> > > > > > Cc: "Piotr Kliczewski" <[email protected]>, [email protected] > > > > > Sent: Thursday, July 3, 2014 4:57:55 PM > > > > > Subject: Re: [ovirt-devel] ovirt-engine-3.5 branching > > > > > > > > > > I concur. > > > > > > > > > > There are too many flows broken on /master/ to consider the 3.5 > > > > > branch > > > > > anything remotely near "stable". > > > > > > > > Wouldn't it be better to keep the current branch as "stabilization > > > > branch" > > > > and test extensively every patch that goes into it instead of keeping > > > > adding > > > > to the master branch and rebranch and then have the same or similar > > > > happen > > > > in the next test day? > > > > > > > > If I remember correctly in the previous release cycle something similar > > > > happened > > > > in the engine an teams tried to push non critical or stabilization > > > > patches > > > > after feature freeze. At the time, it was argued that this release > > > > cycle > > > > it > > > > would be branch and backport. > > > > > > > > I realize, of course, that it is painstaking to backport a great amount > > > > of > > > > patches, but this is a direct result of letting features get merged too > > > > late > > > > in the cycle and before being up to a certain standard of stability. > > > > > > > > I would say "let this backporting frenzy be a lesson to all to be more > > > > conservative > > > > with the timelines in the next cycle" but I understand the other side > > > > of > > > > the > > > > argument, so maybe instead we should just count with an extra week > > > > between > > > > freeze and branching (note that this will delay review and merge of > > > > work > > > > on master for the next feature reducing the chances of big features > > > > being > > > > merged early-middle cycle. > > > > > > I agree with the sentiment, but I think your solution would be > > > counter-productive. > > > > > > The main question here is what's the purpose of the stable branch? > > > The way I understand it, the stable branch is a branch for you to build > > > the > > > system from, assert that the main functionality is working, and report > > > bugs > > > that need fixing before release. > > > > > > With the current "stable" branch, that's a losing effort. It's broken > > > twelve > > > ways from Sunday. Basic functionality does not work. Virtually every > > > patch > > > that fixes something in the master should also be applied to it, which in > > > fact means we're manually rebasing, instead of letting git do it for us. > > > > > > This does not mean, however, that we shouldn't take time an retrospect > > > how > > > we > > > got to this abysmal situation, and thinking of ways to prevent it in the > > > future - it just means we should look forward instead of punishing > > > ourselves > > > for past transgressions. > > > > Update: > > we're planning to do the branch from master (rebase from HEAD), tomorrow > > towards noon time. > Why are we rebasing? Is there anything in the stable branch that isn't in > master? > Shouldn't we just delete this branch, and branch a new one from HEAD? > > > if you have any commits that are relevant only for 3.6 and not for 3.5, > > please don't merge them yet > > until we'll update the 3.5 stable branch. > > > > and email with the exact cutoff commits sha will be sent once the branch is > > updated. > > > > thanks, > > > > Eyal. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > wrt to holding off 3.6 features, I can confirm that from the storage > > > > > side > > > > > nothing has been merged, and we can keep holding them back. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -Allon > > > > > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > > > > From: "Oved Ourfali" <[email protected]> > > > > > > To: [email protected] > > > > > > Cc: "Piotr Kliczewski" <[email protected]> > > > > > > Sent: Thursday, July 3, 2014 5:31:43 PM > > > > > > Subject: [ovirt-devel] ovirt-engine-3.5 branching > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi all, > > > > > > > > > > > > The test day revealed a large amount of issues. These issues are > > > > > > being > > > > > > addressed in the last few days. > > > > > > To avoid the need to back-port each and every one of them to the > > > > > > ovirt-engine-3.5 stable branch, I suggest to give a few days for > > > > > > that > > > > > > effort, > > > > > > and revisit it on mid next week, to asses it again and decide > > > > > > whether > > > > > > to > > > > > > do > > > > > > the branching then. > > > > > > > > > > > > I ask the different maintainers not to push 3.6 relevant material > > > > > > into > > > > > > master > > > > > > in the next few days, until the branching is done. > > > > > > To my knowledge no major (or any) patch related to 3.6 has been > > > > > > merge > > > > > > on > > > > > > master, but please correct me if I'm wrong. > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks all for your efforts in stabilizing the version. > > > > > > > > > > > > Regards, > > > > > > Oved > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > > > Devel mailing list > > > > > > [email protected] > > > > > > http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/devel > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > > Devel mailing list > > > > > [email protected] > > > > > http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/devel > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > Devel mailing list > > > > [email protected] > > > > http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/devel > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > Devel mailing list > > > [email protected] > > > http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/devel > > > > > > _______________________________________________ Devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
