Taras,

Sounds good as long as we substitute the word branches with repositories.
Branches do not make much sense IMHO.

Magnus
Den 19 sep 2014 09:40 skrev "Taras Kondratiuk" <[email protected]
>:

> I'd like to sum up our yesterday's discussion about making merge process
> more
> relaxed. Current process with a single master branch assumes that each
> patch
> need to keep all platforms in a working state, which is next to impossible,
> because patch author doesn't have enough expertise in all platforms. The
> same
> happens with a complex examples. This leads to a significant slow down of
> new
> API sets development.
>
> The idea we came up with is to split the master branch into several
> branches:
> - master: contains core LNG deliverables: linux-generic, tests and simple
>   examples
> - implementation branches (linux-keystone2, linux-dpdk, etc): contains one
>   implementation
> - examples: contains complex examples like IPSec.
>
> Each branch has its maintainer.
> At release point when linux-generic has everything for release we fork a
> release
> branch (odp-v1.0) from master. Other branches get pulled into release
> branch
> when branch maintainer have updated it to the same API level as
> linux-generic in
> release branch.
>
> This approach allows to unblock and speed up linux-generic development.
> As before patches to any branch should go through ML review process.
>
> --
> Taras Kondratiuk
>
> _______________________________________________
> lng-odp mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/lng-odp
>
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to [email protected].
>
_______________________________________________
lng-odp mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/lng-odp

Reply via email to