I think that a release-branch sounds like a good idea. The question is,
how we manage the code/review flow. To be able to review the changes the
should go into the release in the usual way, I think that we’d need to
have Gerrit know about more than one branch. Not sure how easy/difficult
that is. Also, the release branch obviously would need to be in the ASF
git repo.
How much effort do you think this would be (infrastructure-wise)?
Cheers,
Till
On 27 Sep 2015, at 23:31, Chris Hillery wrote:
There are a lot of changes that are stacking up in Asterix because
we're
trying to get a release done. I'm thinking it might be a good exercise
and
preparation for next time if we branched Asterix master for the
release and
started allowing changes to be merged that are for post-release,
instead of
basically having a code freeze which has been going on for, what,
several
months already?
We could either create a release branch off master and do the
necessary
release cleanup over there, or else create a "develop" branch from
master
and start committing new changes there. Branching a release branch off
master probably would require fewer changes to our existing
infrastructure.
Either way, once the release was complete, we'd merge the branch back
onto
master and continue.
Anyone say yay or nay?
Ceej
