On 28/08/14 17:17, Henrik Lindberg wrote: > On 2014-28-08 9:13, Dominic Cleal wrote: >> On 26/08/14 18:23, Eric Sorenson wrote: >>> After the Puppet 3.5.0 release problems, we had a retrospective and tried >>> to figure out some process improvements which would have surfaced the >>> problems earlier. Despite a lengthy 4-week release candidate cycle, that >>> release still had a fatal flaw that nobody had caught until it went into >>> final release. As we talked it over, our thoughts turned to continuous >>> delivery. Puppet (along with most of the other open-source projects) >>> already produces packaged artifacts as moves through our Jenkins pipeline, >>> so it seemed like a natural step to make those packages publicly available. >>> >>> In lieu of release candidates, we are moving toward a more automated system >>> which will have the latest green builds (passed spec and Beaker acceptance >>> tests) cut off the 'master' branch for most of our projects. >> >> Would it be possible to build packages for other branches (like >> puppet-4, or facter-2 when it was in development) in the future? I'm >> especially interested in tracking incompatible Puppet 4 changes. >> > > We really hope that the puppet4 and facter2 branches were a special > circumstance. It is not our intention to have long running feature > branches. As soon as 3.7.0 is released, the puppet4 branch will be > merged to master, and the puppet4 branch will be retired. > > Since 3.7.0 is about to be released very soon there will not be any > puppet4 builds in nightly (until it is on master).
Okay, that makes sense. Thanks Henrik. -- Dominic Cleal Red Hat Engineering -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Puppet Developers" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/puppet-dev/53FF56B3.2080709%40redhat.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
