From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from dan.rpsys.net ([93.97.175.187]) by linuxtogo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1R6ssT-0001ta-0d for openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org; Fri, 23 Sep 2011 01:40:25 +0200 Received: from localhost (dan.rpsys.net [127.0.0.1]) by dan.rpsys.net (8.14.2/8.14.2/Debian-2build1) with ESMTP id p8MNfJGL003248 for ; Fri, 23 Sep 2011 00:41:20 +0100 X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at dan.rpsys.net Received: from dan.rpsys.net ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (dan.rpsys.net [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id SCuRmzLk37Zt for ; Fri, 23 Sep 2011 00:41:19 +0100 (BST) Received: from [192.168.250.158] ([116.246.20.131]) (authenticated bits=0) by dan.rpsys.net (8.14.2/8.14.2/Debian-2build1) with ESMTP id p8MNfCpa003233 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT) for ; Fri, 23 Sep 2011 00:41:16 +0100 From: Richard Purdie To: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer Date: Fri, 23 Sep 2011 00:33:15 +0100 In-Reply-To: References: X-Mailer: Evolution 3.1.91- Message-ID: <1316734501.28323.18.camel@ted> Mime-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Branch management for OE-Core release X-BeenThere: openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.11 Precedence: list Reply-To: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer List-Id: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 22 Sep 2011 23:40:25 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Thu, 2011-09-22 at 09:49 -0300, Otavio Salvador wrote: > I noticed the 2011-1 branch today and it seems it is not fully merged > into master; this is a mistake since it will create an upgrade path > problem for users of it. Its a branch, master continues on, that branch just gets fixes suitable for a stable/release branch. I appreciate people have different definitions of stable and we need to do a better job of documenting what those criteria are. As a quick attempt: I've always said with "stable" branches, its up to the person maintaining it to define what it means. Right now, I'm trying to get a branch where all the Yocto QA tests pass so it has some base functionality across all the different architectures, image targets, SDKs and so forth. Longer term I'm initially proposing it will take the same kinds of changes as we'd take for point releases in Yocto. These are high impact bug fixes, build system OS fixes as new distros appear and security issues that we're aware of. What is out of scope are new features and significant version changes. The QT version increment is marginal in that regard. If after release when we have more time to test it works out ok it might be considered being just a point release and not a major version change. Cheers, Richard