From: Stefan Schmidt <stefan@datenfreihafen.org>
To: openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org
Subject: Re: 2011.03 release testing, starts soon!
Date: Thu, 10 Feb 2011 09:31:33 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20110210083133.GL28019@excalibur.local> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTinrp6netE73j_iQmHu+sA5T4sUDEJJbijL45dKR@mail.gmail.com>
Hello.
On Wed, 2011-02-09 at 12:30, Khem Raj wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 9, 2011 at 2:18 AM, Koen Kooi <k.kooi@student.utwente.nl> wrote:
> > On 09-02-11 10:56, Stefan Schmidt wrote:
> >
> >>> 2. Do not delete the release branch after 2011.03 will be released (just like
> >>> it was done for 2010.12), but let it live and allow developpers committing
> >>> bug-fixes (backporting choosen things?) reported back by OE users (some would
> >>> would be happy to contribute this way)
> >>
> >> That was already discussed. We make a tag with the release rev from which can be
> >> branched again _if_ people are stepping up to support this branch on a mid or
> >> long term base.
> >>
> >> The branch Tom is using until the release is pretty useless froma history point
> >> of view (all changes must be in master as well). When he thinks the release is
> >> good enough the tag gets added and the old branch deleted. For the last release
> >> nobody cared to support it afterwards with bugfixes so no release branch was
> >> created.
> >>
> >> I'm thinking about this for the upcoming release. If all works well we will base
> >> a product on it which I would like to support directly from such a release
> >> branch.
> >>
> >> The hard part is how people could decide on pooling resources on this. Defining
> >> goals for such a branch and stuff. E.g. only take serious fixes? What about
> >> package updates? Security fixes? changes on the toolchain or classes?
> >>
>
> I would suggest to take only bugfixes and refrain from infrastructure
> changes which usually
> happen metadata wide and toolchain and classes are biggest part of
> this and with time backports
> into long term branches become more and more complex and painful and
> it may be that you have to do
> entirely different patch to solve the same issue in this branch which
> has been fixed differently upstream
Staying away from infrastructure and toolchain changes is something I really
want to see for such a branch.
From my BugLabs side I would expect bug fixes but also some package updates.
That would be stuff based on the java/osgi framework we are deploying so
hopefully it would not make problems for anyone else. I don't expect to much
problems with that.
With regards to the lifetime I don't see this as a several years branch fo our
product (thinking about oe-core for the next release). Obviously it is still
fine for other people to use it that long. The current stable branch is a good
example for this. It is still used and different companies/people are happy with
it having no updates at all for some time. :)
I would expect something else for the branch on top of the 2011-03 release. Some
more changes in the begining while fixing problems that poped up after the tag
was created but commits will slow down after some months.
> I think if such a branch is to be created it should be created from
> the release tag after the release happens
Agreed.
> >> This is up to the group who wants to support such a branch. Anyone else
> >> interested in doing this for 2011-03?
>
> If such a branch is expected for long term then its better to decide
> its policies on patches
> from upstream pov all fixes that go into this branch should first go
> into master if its not
> a direct backport of some sort. That way we can be sure that we dont
> lose changes that should be in master.
Agreed as well. It gets a mess if we start fixing stuff in the release branch
only.
regards
Stefan Schmidt
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-02-10 8:32 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-02-08 19:41 2011.03 release testing, starts soon! Tom Rini
2011-02-09 9:25 ` Aeschbacher, Fabrice
2011-02-09 9:56 ` Stefan Schmidt
2011-02-09 10:18 ` Koen Kooi
2011-02-09 10:42 ` Stefan Schmidt
2011-02-09 11:20 ` Koen Kooi
2011-02-09 20:30 ` Khem Raj
2011-02-10 8:31 ` Stefan Schmidt [this message]
2011-02-09 14:47 ` Tom Rini
2011-02-10 9:42 ` Aeschbacher, Fabrice
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20110210083133.GL28019@excalibur.local \
--to=stefan@datenfreihafen.org \
--cc=openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.