Precisely! We cut a branch as a Release Candidate. nuttx-MM.mm.rr-rcnn. During the release cycle it can have back ports from master if a new feature or bug fix is found it is added if deemed necessary to the release.
Workflow Proposal I would ask that we adopt a workflow similar to PX4. [1] - see page 16. Or parts of it that work for us. All development would be done on branches and only squashed atomic commits would be done to master. (Think constantly working bisect on master) Branches can be rebased - to reduce noise until review [1] see page 17 All commit message would have context. [1] - see page 16 (Think emails subject tells me what happed, Filter out noise) Regards, David [1] https://drive.google.com/open?id=1XHaNB3nTarjPL-CzO9CpZTl1NgX_kpqY -----Original Message----- From: spudaneco [mailto:spudan...@gmail.com] Sent: Thursday, December 12, 2019 9:16 PM To: dev@nuttx.apache.org Subject: Re: Project Emails Sent from Samsung tablet. I think we should use release branches, unless we want to lock downthe repo against all changes for the duration of the release prep ->release candidate -> testing -> debating -> voting cycle, which couldtake a non trivial amount of time.You could carry on business as usual on a temporary branch, but that feels awkward.
