-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
On 10/11/12 22:29, Stefan Roese wrote:
On 10/11/2012 08:30 PM, Scott Wood wrote:
But, yes, it bears more thinking if we want the next branch open for longer than it has historically been, if we want that. And we have at least historically been saying that next can and will be rebased.
IMHO it would be nice for the next branch to open immediately after the merge window closes, and be kept up to date except during the merge window. Historically the next branch has opened when someone requests a pull into it, but how do I make a sane pull request when the next branch has been untouched since the last release?
This has been discussed on the U-Boot BoF in Geneva a few months ago. And it was generally agreed upon that opening the next branch earlier (best directly after the merge window) would be a big plus.
IIRC, then Tom did exactly this in this release cycle.
Yes, I got -rc1 out sooner than we do historically. I think there's a few changes I would like to make about how we handle branching, releasing and merge windows. But this thread has reminded me that I need to think very carefully about how we manage branches that are longer lived. And I don't want to make big changes for v2013.01 but prepare everyone to try them for v2013.04 (and .07).
- -- Tom