> > We should already be on 2.2 and not on master, which is the future: 2.3 >
Yes, that was also my proposal. However, people appear to be afraid to not have the 2.2.0 tag in master. But note that if the 2.2-branch in this scenario is merged back into master after the release, it is equivalent to merging 2.3-staging to master in the current proposal. In both ways the tag ends up in master, and there is not a real difference between merging A into B anhd merging B into A. 2.2.1-staging is not necessary as all changes are so important that they can probably go to 2.2.0 as well. Changes for 2.2.2 can be cherry-picked from 2.3-staging (or master) when 2.1.1 is released. Vincent
