Thanks for clarification. On Wed, Jul 2, 2014 at 6:59 PM, Jeremy Stanley <fu...@yuggoth.org> wrote:
> On 2014-07-02 16:14:52 +0400 (+0400), Yuriy Taraday wrote: > > Why do we need these short-lived 'proposed' branches in any form? > > Why can't we just use release branches for this and treat them as > > stable when appropriate tag is added to some commit in them? > > The primary reasons are: > > 1. People interpret "stable/juno" as an indication that it is a > stable released branch, so "proposed/juno" makes it a little more > obvious to those people that it isn't yet. > That could be dealt with by naming them "release/juno" instead, I think. 2. Current process delegates pre-release change approval to a > different group of reviewers than post-release change approval, and > the easiest way to enforce this is through Gerrit ACL matches on > different git ref patterns for their respective target branches. > But this one is rather hard to overcome without temporary branch or constant ACL changes. It looks like mirrors will have to bear having a number of dead branches in them - one for each release. -- Kind regards, Yuriy.
_______________________________________________ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev