Ben, thanks for the clarification. I'm in agreement with the points you made.
Once we have consensus, would you mind updating the doc? On Wed, Jul 11, 2018 at 5:15 PM Benjamin Mahler <[email protected]> wrote: > I realized recently that we aren't all on the same page with backporting. > We currently only document the following: > > "Typically the fix for an issue that is affecting supported releases lands > on the master branch and is then backported to the release branch(es). In > rare cases, the fix might directly go into a release branch without landing > on master (e.g., fix / issue is not applicable to master)." [1] > > This leaves room for interpretation about what lies outside of "typical". > Here's the simplest way I can explain what I stick to, and I'd like to hear > what others have in mind: > > * By default, bug fixes at any level should be backported to existing > release branches if it affects those releases. Especially important: > crashes, bugs in non-experimental features. > > * Exceptional cases that can omit backporting: difficult to backport fixes > (especially if the bugs are deemed of low priority), bugs in experimental > features. > > * Exceptional non-bug cases that can be backported: performance > improvements. > > I realize that there is a ton of subtlety here (even in terms of which > things are defined as bugs). But I hope we can lay down a policy that gives > everyone the right mindset for common cases and then discuss corner cases > on-demand in the future. > > [1] http://mesos.apache.org/documentation/latest/versioning/ >
