On Tue, Apr 12, 2016 at 11:57:40AM -0400, Richard Heck wrote: > On 04/12/2016 04:42 AM, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: > > Le 12/04/2016 04:09, Richard Heck a écrit : > >> I propose to create a 2.3.staging branch so development can proceed. We > >> did this with this 2.1 cycle. Alternatively, we could create a > >> 2.2.0.fixes branch, from which 2.2.0 will be tagged, and you can have > >> full control over that. > > > > Why don't we branch 2.2.x right now and resume working on master? Do > > you think that the amount of work until 2.2.0 is so large that this > > would entail work duplication? > > I thought about that, too, but was reluctant to suggest it for fear of > starting a flame war. But it would be a natural thing to do at this point. > > Scott, do you have views about this?
Would we then merge 2.2.x into master at the 2.2.0 release? Scott
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
