On Fri, Feb 26, 2010 at 11:53 PM, Rishikesh K Rajak <[email protected]> wrote: > Welcome to ltp community. > > There are four branches in ltp-dev.git repository that track the source tree > of ltp: "master", "maint", "next", "pu". I may add more maintanance > branch if we have huge backward of incompatible feature updates in the > future to keep an older release alive. > > The master branch is meant to contain what are very well tested and > ready to be used in production environment. There could occassionaly be > minor breakage but they are not expected to be anything major, and more > importantly those will be quickly and trivially fixable. > > So if some hotfixes has gone with this branch, you can find one more > digit has been added to version release (e.g: YYYYMMDD.1 ), So it means > it is more stable than YYYYMMDD release. I may be changing this format > if i can see a better format or if you have some suggestion then it is > most welcome. > > The "maint" branch is called one step before master branch, which will > contain all features or patches that are going to following month end > release. > (e.g: If this month end ltp-full-YYYYMMDD is going be to released > then all the stable patches you can find in this branch through out the > month, and one important point for this branch is all the patches which > has gone to this branch will be well tested and make sure that there is > no regression or breakage and Acked/Reviewed by Someone from mailing > list.)
As suggested before, branching maint off of master and labeling appropriately is be the best way to go as it keeps things simple. Having a release label suffixed with a revision number would be the best way, and once the next release comes out, any `maintenance' fixes that could go into prior releases shouldn't and won't (again, to avoid branching and labeling messes). > "next" branch will contain all the patches which has been sent on > ltp-mailing list after getting "Acked-By" and/or "Reviewed-By" anyone > from list. This branch is quite unstable but user can find their > immediate patches over here to see the stability.You can find most > unstable about this branch w.r.t feature wise or may be sometime build wise. > > > NOTE: > ===== > So i always encourage testcase developer/ltp-list member to send me the > patches against this branch. And it will be closely reviewed and > acknowledged by any member from ltp-list community members. Once it gets > Acked/Reveiwed-By then it will promoted to maint branch for maintainer > testing and checking for stability, otherwise it will go to "pu" branch > for further discussion and decision. These pending patch can be worked > on following month and once it is mature enough to meet the stability > then it can be directly jump to maint branch, here i may ask the > submitter to submit the patch once again against maint branch. > > "pu" branch is basically "proposed update" branch which will contain all > the remainder of above branches. By the above definition of how "next" > works, you can tell that this branch will contain quite experimental and > obviosuly broken stuff. Getting back to this message, I honestly think that we shouldn't allow for `pu' branches because the number of commits going into `next' is still relatively small, meaning that having too many branches will make us dyslexic and we'll fail to test changes properly. It is the job of everyone proposing a commit to fully test it, if at all possible, and for cases where they can't they provide a patch and others who can test it could and should test it (I know this is a highly ideal case and it's something that I'm going to hold myself to more going forward, now that we're moving away from cvs). Thanks, -Garrett ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Download Intel® Parallel Studio Eval Try the new software tools for yourself. Speed compiling, find bugs proactively, and fine-tune applications for parallel performance. See why Intel Parallel Studio got high marks during beta. http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-sw-dev _______________________________________________ Ltp-list mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ltp-list
