I see zero benefits from cutting branch_7x now. Shawn, can you describe why you think we should do this?
My interpretation of your argument is that you’re in favor of delaying cutting branch_7_0 until feature freeze - which BTW is the status quo - but I don’t get why that argues for cutting branch_7x now. -- Steve www.lucidworks.com > On Jun 2, 2017, at 12:14 PM, Anshum Gupta <[email protected]> wrote: > > I was trying to find this stuff in the ReleaseToDo documentation as I don't > exactly remember what I did for 5.0, or what happened during 6.0 but there > doesn't seem to be any. > > What you suggest makes things easier for sure but it ideally would also mean > that we don't add new features to 7x. If we intend to continue adding new > features, then we lose the idea behind cutting the branch. > > The good part of having 7x, and 7.0 cut at the same time is that we can then > just work on 7.0 to get it stable, without adding more features. > > What does everyone else think about this? Also, we can go with what we did in > the previous releases if that seems like the best option. > > -Anshum > > On Fri, Jun 2, 2017 at 9:01 AM Shawn Heisey <[email protected]> wrote: > On 6/2/2017 6:45 AM, Adrien Grand wrote: > > Hi Anshum, will you branch both branch_7x and branch_7_0 at the same > > time? I think this is what we need to do but I'm asking in case you > > had planned differently. > > It seems like a better idea to create only branch_7x right now, and > delay creating the 7_0 branch until we're ready to declare a feature > freeze, after which new stuff would be slated for 7.1. > > For the two major releases I've witnessed, it took quite a while to go > from trunk/master to new release. Most work for that preparation will > already require committing to both master and 7x, with some changes only > happening in one branch. If we create the 7_0 branch now, a lot of work > over a fairly long timeframe will need to be applied to three branches > instead of two. Backporting twice isn't difficult, but it is an extra > step that could easily be forgotten, causing unwanted divergence between > branches. > > Usually the amount of time we need to worry about three branches is only > a few days and doesn't involve very many commits. I don't think we want > that situation for as long as it would take to get from master to 7.0. > > Thanks, > Shawn > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
