Thanks all for the reviews! I applied my monster-fix branch into branches/0.11.x now. Boy do I love me some git :)
Cheers Jan -- On 14 Jun 2010, at 00:24, Adam Kocoloski wrote: > On Jun 13, 2010, at 12:25 PM, Jan Lehnardt wrote: > >> >> On 5 Jun 2010, at 23:45, J Chris Anderson wrote: >> >>> >>> On Jun 5, 2010, at 12:44 PM, Adam Kocoloski wrote: >>> >>>> I've only been merging bugfixes into 0.11.x for a long time now. I think >>>> I committed a number of things into trunk related to JIRA tickets with a >>>> Fix Version of 1.1. >>>> >>> >>> I've been reviewing the diff between trunk and 0.11.x -- I can't find >>> anything that shows up in the diff that shouldn't be in 1.0. I'm happy to >>> recommend that we cut 1.0 from trunk. >>> >>> I'd like it if others could repeat the exercise and see if they agree with >>> me. There are some things that cover a lot of code (the >>> couch_util:get_value patch and the base64 changes, for instance) which >>> aren't at risk of creating bugs and will only make it harder to backport to >>> 1.0 if we don't put them in the 1.0 release. >>> >>> I don't have much opinion about what should go into 0.11.x from trunk, but >>> that's a different topic. >> >> I got it all solved and have 0.11.x merged up all right. >> >> In the process I found I had a faulty backport in there. >> >> See my work here: http://github.com/janl/couchdb/tree/0.11.x-monster-fix >> >> This is mostly reverting and reapplying in correct order patches to trunk >> into 0.11.x. >> >> I'm happy to commit that as soon as I get a green light. >> >> While going through all the commits, there are a few more where I agree >> with Chris that I'd like to backport before branching 1.0 from 0.11.x but I >> think we should go ahead as planned and branch 1.0.x from 0.11.x. >> >> trunk will then be 1.1.x. >> >> Go? >> >> Cheers >> Jan >> -- > > The 0.11 branch still feels weird to me. I thought commits on release > branches were supposed to be bugfixes only. With 0.11.x the criteria seem to > be > > 1) bugfixes > 2) anything committed to trunk by Damien > 3) anything else needed to make 2) merge cleanly > > If 1.0 is supposed to be 0.11 + bugfixes + Damien's work, rather than 0.11 + > bugfixes, shouldn't we have a /branches/1.0.x for that? > > Regardless, the important thing is that the codebase for 1.0 is stable and > working. Jan's 0.11.x-monster-fix satisfies that. Good work! > > Adam >
