2007/9/13, Tim Ellison <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > Hi Stepan, thanks for bringing this up again. > > Stepan Mishura wrote: > > OK, at least nobody suggested that we have longer then 3-month > > schedule. That means that we should have next milestone no later then > > September, 30. > > Agreed, let's shoot for the end of the month for M3. > > > So I'd like to remind that we are close to the mid of September and > > propose the following M3 schedule: > > - Septemer 15: feature freeze - svn trunk is frozen > > I think this time it makes sense to freeze the trunk instead of > > branching to avoid doing merges for bugfixes > Yep, so no new areas of significant functionality should be introduced > after Sept 15th; but we can continue to do bug/perf/tidy-up type changes > during this period. +1
> > - Septemer 22: code freeze - M3 branch(tag?) is created and the trunk > > is unfrozen. All fixes for M3 go to the branch. > So what are you proposing gets branched? everything (and only those > things) that contributes to the federated build? e.g. drlvm, classlib, > and jdktools. I assume that the BTI code is not branched too? > > Can BTI and other scripts cope ok with switching to the code on a branch > rather than dealing with HEAD? > > Once the M3 branch is created then I assume that the HEAD is opened once > again for code and feature changes, but changes to the stable M3 branch > require our established `review then commit` style. > > > - Septemer 29 :release date - M3-branch is merged with the trunk. > Though there is no reason why we would not merge the M3 branch into HEAD > during the M3-shut-down period either, right? Yes, I agree that we can commit the patches to the branch and the HEAD. > At the end of Sept we do the final merge, then delete the M3 branch. I'd prefer to keep the branch for a while... At least to the next milestone... SY, Alexey
