Thanks for that reminder, David! OK, so, per David's e-mail reference, it looks like the intent of x.y-forward is what I referred to as option 2:
4.4-forward contains changes that might go into 4.4 (if a cherry pick is requested) and changes that would go into 4.4.1, should such a release ever be made. We can - of course - debate if this is still what we want to do; however, I would say - for 4.4 - we should treat 4.4-forward the way we described in this previous e-mail. In other words, do not assume 4.4-forward will eventually be equal to 4.4 before 4.4 is released. 4.4-forward should be used for fixes that need to make their way into 4.4 and for fixes that do not need to be in 4.4, but rather in 4.4.1, should such a release ever happen. On Mon, Jun 9, 2014 at 10:23 AM, David Nalley <da...@gnsa.us> wrote: > On Mon, Jun 9, 2014 at 10:39 AM, Mike Tutkowski > <mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com> wrote: > > Right - we need to decide as a community what a forward branch really > means. > > > > On Monday, June 9, 2014, Koushik Das <koushik....@citrix.com> wrote: > > > > So a bit of background reading: > http://markmail.org/message/aux2yjxpudotu7qu > > This is when we started with the -forward branches. > > --David > -- *Mike Tutkowski* *Senior CloudStack Developer, SolidFire Inc.* e: mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com o: 303.746.7302 Advancing the way the world uses the cloud <http://solidfire.com/solution/overview/?video=play>*™*
