From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from [77.241.230.245] (helo=waldorf.attingo.nl) by linuxtogo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1R79uh-00043O-Ks for openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org; Fri, 23 Sep 2011 19:51:51 +0200 Received: from ndx.aas.attingo.nl ([77.241.230.246]:10833 helo=[10.0.5.155]) by waldorf.attingo.nl with esmtpsa (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.74) (envelope-from ) id 1R79Yv-0000dX-Ss for openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org; Fri, 23 Sep 2011 19:29:24 +0200 From: Richard Purdie To: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer Date: Fri, 23 Sep 2011 18:30:10 +0100 In-Reply-To: References: <1316734501.28323.18.camel@ted> X-Mailer: Evolution 3.1.91- Message-ID: <1316799031.3125.3.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: Fri, 23 Sep 2011 17:51:51 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Fri, 2011-09-23 at 13:41 -0300, Otavio Salvador wrote: > On Thu, Sep 22, 2011 at 20:33, Richard Purdie > wrote: > > 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: > > The point here is not about what is allowed to get into it or not but > how it is going to work related to master. > > The point is that if we keep it as a branch and doesn't merge it into master. > > If we merge the stable branch into master, from time to time, users > that want to go to move to master can merge master into their branch > as it has a common parent and the conflicts fixed. If it is done too > late, it becomes a nightmare. > > This is something I'd like to discuss and see how people think about > the process and what way we ought to use. I don't really see the point of this. Basically you're asking that every time there is a commit to the branch there is also a merge commit. You can just as easily either force a checkout of master, or merge against master with a one sided merge. Git doesn't have the confidence to do that automatically but I'm pretty sure there is a simple way to tell git to do a one sided merge... Cheers, Richard