On Thu, Nov 21, 2013 at 1:58 AM, Thierry Carrez <thie...@openstack.org>wrote:
> Mark Washenberger wrote: > > [...] > > In order to mitigate that risk, I think it would make a lot of sense to > > have a place to stage and carefully consider all the breaking changes we > > want to make. I also would like to have that place be somewhere in > > Gerrit so that it fits in with our current submission and review > > process. But if that place is the 'master' branch and we take a long > > time, then we can't really release any bug fixes to the v0 series in the > > meantime. > > > > I can think of a few workarounds, but they all seem kinda bad. For > > example, we could put all the breaking changes together in one commit, > > or we could do all this prep in github. > > > > My question is, is there a correct way to stage breaking changes in > > Gerrit? Has some other team already dealt with this problem? > > [...] > > It sounds like a case where we could use a feature branch. There have > been a number of them in the past when people wanted to incrementally > work on new features without affecting master, and at first glance > (haha) it sounds appropriate here. As a quick sidebar, what does a feature branch entail in today's parlance? > Infra team, thoughts ? > > -- > Thierry Carrez (ttx) > > _______________________________________________ > OpenStack-dev mailing list > OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev >
_______________________________________________ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
