From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from 26.mail-out.ovh.net ([91.121.27.225]) by linuxtogo.org with smtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1PEIWB-00046a-Dq for openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org; Fri, 05 Nov 2010 10:23:31 +0100 Received: (qmail 20640 invoked by uid 503); 5 Nov 2010 09:27:20 -0000 Received: from b9.ovh.net (HELO mail428.ha.ovh.net) (213.186.33.59) by 26.mail-out.ovh.net with SMTP; 5 Nov 2010 09:27:20 -0000 Received: from b0.ovh.net (HELO queueout) (213.186.33.50) by b0.ovh.net with SMTP; 5 Nov 2010 11:22:40 +0200 Received: from pac33-2-82-240-38-71.fbx.proxad.net (HELO ?192.168.1.15?) (ebenard%eukrea.com@82.240.38.71) by ns0.ovh.net with SMTP; 5 Nov 2010 11:22:38 +0200 Message-ID: <4CD3CCDE.3080306@eukrea.com> Date: Fri, 05 Nov 2010 10:22:38 +0100 From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Eric_B=E9nard?= User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; fr; rv:1.9.2.12) Gecko/20101027 Thunderbird/3.1.6 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org References: <20101104220649.GE28852@denix.org> <4CD3349D.6060904@eukrea.com> <20101104224752.GH28852@denix.org> <20101105065240.GI3440@jama> In-Reply-To: <20101105065240.GI3440@jama> X-Ovh-Tracer-Id: 14762236629492542793 X-Ovh-Remote: 82.240.38.71 (pac33-2-82-240-38-71.fbx.proxad.net) X-Ovh-Local: 213.186.33.20 (ns0.ovh.net) X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 91.121.27.225 X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: eric@eukrea.com X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.2.5 (2008-06-10) on discovery X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00 autolearn=ham version=3.2.5 X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2.1 (built Wed, 25 Jun 2008 17:20:07 +0000) X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on linuxtogo.org) Subject: Re: OpenEmbedded Release 2010.12 --- needs your help! X-BeenThere: openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.11 Precedence: list Reply-To: openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org List-Id: Using the OpenEmbedded metadata to build Distributions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 05 Nov 2010 09:23:31 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Le 05/11/2010 07:52, Martin Jansa a écrit : > what about branching future release those 2-3 weeks ago and keep master for > active development? > Stabilizing the master branch is active development as this allows to have stronger fundation for the next features you can introduce 2 or 3 weeks after the stabilization weeks starts. > I know it could lower number of people using this future release branch > during testing period before release, but still seems better then pushing 3 > weeks of commits from my local branch as soon as release is branched and > master open for new recipes again. > That's the way linux, u-boot & co are running and when the new merge window opens several thousand of patches can be merged in a few days. If we don't do that, the idea of stable release which implies detecting and fixing potential failures introduced by previous big changes will fail. Eric