Overall I’m strongly opposed to any solution which introduces additional branches.
OTOH I have no problem at all with backporting JDK 21 support to an existing branch where viable. > On 30 Oct 2025, at 15:23, Aleksey Yeshchenko <[email protected]> wrote: > > The mandatory extra work would come from having additional branches on the > merge path up. In addition to actually merging the code, it’s the hassle of > getting green CI results for the backport branches, delaying the merge. > > Or these branches are skipped on the regular merge path and it becomes the > job of the branch-backport volunteers - now responsible for every single > commit that lands in that branch, including the future-ports of bug fixes. > >> On 24 Oct 2025, at 07:49, Dinesh Joshi <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> Committers are not required to backport their features to these branches so >> I don't see this as 'mandatory' for all committers. Please elaborate if >> there are aspects of maintenance that I've missed. >
