From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail.dream-property.net ([82.149.226.172]) by linuxtogo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1RTvlA-0007D7-Br for openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org; Fri, 25 Nov 2011 14:24:08 +0100 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.dream-property.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id DF64F3156595 for ; Fri, 25 Nov 2011 14:17:32 +0100 (CET) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at mail.dream-property.net Received: from mail.dream-property.net ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mail.dream-property.net [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id oYmq6iEkGbUL for ; Fri, 25 Nov 2011 14:17:23 +0100 (CET) Received: from [172.22.22.61] (drms-590c4dea.pool.mediaWays.net [89.12.77.234]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.dream-property.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 539533156591 for ; Fri, 25 Nov 2011 14:17:23 +0100 (CET) Message-ID: <4ECF9562.30503@opendreambox.org> Date: Fri, 25 Nov 2011 14:17:22 +0100 From: Andreas Oberritter User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:7.0.1) Gecko/20111031 Thunderbird/7.0.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org References: <4ECD76E2.3040001@opendreambox.org> <20111124170654.GA28572@sakrah.homelinux.org> <4ECE81D3.2010603@opendreambox.org> In-Reply-To: Subject: Re: Plans for OE classic future 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, 25 Nov 2011 13:24:08 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 24.11.2011 19:43, Otavio Salvador wrote: > On Thu, Nov 24, 2011 at 15:41, Andreas Oberritter wrote: > >> ... >> >> I would like stronger arguments for why master and not 2011.03 release >>> branch ? >> >> Obviously, you can push a changeset to master, wait for someone to >> complain about a bug, fix the bug, wait for silence, merge it into 2011.03. >> > > Sure not; 2011.03 is for bugfixes not huge changesets with new things. Who said "huge" or "new"? Even bugfixes need testing. That's why changesets should go through master after all. >> Would you prefer experimental changesets in 2011.03? >> > > This is not going to happen has 2011.03 is not a playground but a stable > branch. Exactly. That's what master is good for. Everything that hasn't been tested in many environments is experimental by nature. You simply can't commit anything to 2011.03 directly, for it would be experimental. It has to be tested somewhere. That's master. (Yes, Koen, we know, OE-core is an option, but not for some of us.) > You're confusing development and maintainence branch meaning here. Obviously not. Regards, Andreas