Good points. I should have mentioned that. At this point no new features, no improvements, no enhancements should be done on 5. Just bug fixes.
And to be clear, I am actually fine with continuing to develop the bug fixes on 5. The point was more about pushing something to 5 and then that is it. We have to clearly decide as a team (1) whether that change needs to be done on 6 and (2) how to go about that. Definitely for some period of time I fully expect that to mean Andrea, Chris, Davide or myself being involved in all such discussions simply because we know 6 better than others. Personally, I prefer developing on 6 and back-porting, but that distinction not really relevant yet - it will become relevant as 6 gets to more of a CR state. On Thu, Dec 6, 2018 at 8:35 AM andrea boriero <and...@hibernate.org> wrote: > In my opinion we have to distinguish between the types of issues: > > - improvements, I think they must be done only in 6.0 and backported > only if it is easy > - minor bugs or bugs with a workaround, I think they should be > resolved in 6.0 (in case the feature causing the issue is not yet > implemented in 6.0 he solution should be delayed ) and then backported > - critical bugs should be solved in 6.0 and 5.x in case it is too > difficult to solve them in 6.0 then just add a disabled test. > > > On Thu, 6 Dec 2018 at 13:17, Yoann Rodiere <yo...@hibernate.org> wrote: > >> I personally don't have a problem with that, since I don't contribute very >> often, but I'd like to point out this moves most of the workload of >> merging >> changes into 6 from Andrea/Chris to Gail/Guillaume. >> Another problem being that the tests created/changed in 5.x may not work >> in >> 6 for completely different reasons (e.g. "not implemented yet"). Which >> will >> be hard to diagnose for those not working on 6 on a day-to-day basis. >> >> But I suppose it could work if we moved the focus away from 5.x >> maintenance, which is perhaps what you had in mind? >> >> Yoann Rodière >> Hibernate NoORM Team >> yo...@hibernate.org >> >> >> On Thu, 6 Dec 2018 at 14:01, Steve Ebersole <st...@hibernate.org> wrote: >> >> > Today, I promise ;), I will release 6.0 Alpha1. But I wanted to start a >> > discussion about managing the master and 6.0 branches in terms of >> > commit/push. To date we (mostly Andrea and Chris, thanks guys!) have >> had >> > to perform very painful "merging" from master to 6.0. As 6.0 was in a >> > pre-Alpha state, that was fine. However, now that we are starting the >> > Alpha release cycle, that is no longer reasonable. So as of today we >> > really need a new strategy here. However it works out, changes made to >> > master than also affect 6.0 should be done in both places. >> > >> > This has 2 benefits IMO: >> > >> > 1. Obviously it removes the need to perform these massive, >> > time-consuming "merges" >> > 2. A great side effect is that it gets people with 6.0 code base >> > differences. >> > _______________________________________________ >> > hibernate-dev mailing list >> > hibernate-dev@lists.jboss.org >> > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hibernate-dev >> > >> _______________________________________________ >> hibernate-dev mailing list >> hibernate-dev@lists.jboss.org >> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hibernate-dev > > _______________________________________________ hibernate-dev mailing list hibernate-dev@lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hibernate-dev
