From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Alexander Litvinov Subject: Re: Question: next, master and pu branches Date: Fri, 2 Feb 2007 12:52:13 +0600 Message-ID: <200702021252.14076.litvinov2004@gmail.com> References: <200702021142.08975.litvinov2004@gmail.com> <7v8xfhksg0.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: git@vger.kernel.org To: Junio C Hamano X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Fri Feb 02 07:52:28 2007 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1HCsHc-0007mC-1l for gcvg-git@gmane.org; Fri, 02 Feb 2007 07:52:28 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1423156AbXBBGwZ (ORCPT ); Fri, 2 Feb 2007 01:52:25 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1423158AbXBBGwY (ORCPT ); Fri, 2 Feb 2007 01:52:24 -0500 Received: from ug-out-1314.google.com ([66.249.92.168]:22224 "EHLO ug-out-1314.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1423156AbXBBGwY (ORCPT ); Fri, 2 Feb 2007 01:52:24 -0500 Received: by ug-out-1314.google.com with SMTP id 44so685041uga for ; Thu, 01 Feb 2007 22:52:20 -0800 (PST) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=received:from:to:subject:date:user-agent:cc:references:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:message-id; b=f81ZvsXO2TYeurBQxni0XoTE44Tma7GbmyTkC9hXU+yyqQ94ysk7IZ158ZwCMgmvvDxW3p5WqcGOm65dw9hn2Vp5TxT9XcDC31tCmYp3YrWC9SL5zQzzYx+QY+kKFpk2FT1WYP2/DZ5uGs0DYBbL70DnpvoaS4rK4gHkuEIOdh8= Received: by 10.67.117.2 with SMTP id u2mr3917395ugm.1170399140726; Thu, 01 Feb 2007 22:52:20 -0800 (PST) Received: from lan.ac-sw.lcl ( [81.1.223.2]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id k1sm4733826ugf.2007.02.01.22.52.19; Thu, 01 Feb 2007 22:52:20 -0800 (PST) User-Agent: KMail/1.8 In-Reply-To: <7v8xfhksg0.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> Content-Disposition: inline Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: > I think what you are looking for is how my 'maint' and 'master' > branches are maintained; 'maint' corresponds to your "stable > release" while 'master' corresponds to your "develment branch". > > When a stable release is cut, 'maint' is forked from there. > > Truly obvious corrections will be applied on top of the tip of > 'maint' directly, while if there are any doubt about a proposed > change I might fork a topic off of the tip of 'maint' and cook > the fix for a while until I finally merge it to 'maint'. This > way, 'maint' will be "bugfix only since the last release". > > The tip of 'maint' will be merged into 'master', from time to > time, to make sure that all fixes will be in 'master'. > > When it is time for a new release to be cut, I'd make sure that > the tip of 'maint' is merged into 'master' (it usually is) and > then the tip of the 'master' is tagged to be released. After a > release is made, I could have two maintenance branches (one that > continues on top of the old codebase, another that fixes the new > release). A fix that can apply to both codebases will be > applied to the maintenance branch for the old release and then > its tip can be pulled into the maintenance branch for the new > release and then its tip can further be merged into the > development branch. > > At some point, the codebases for the older release and the > current release become diverged enough that merging could become > inpractical (the same bug may need different fix if the > infrastracture has become different); you would need to bite the > bullet and fix it twice (i.e. differently). Thanks for detailed description. As a cunclusion I would like to say: all bug fixes are made in the stable branch and then stable branch will be merged to development branch. That is easy !