Mark Washenberger wrote: > [...] > In order to mitigate that risk, I think it would make a lot of sense to > have a place to stage and carefully consider all the breaking changes we > want to make. I also would like to have that place be somewhere in > Gerrit so that it fits in with our current submission and review > process. But if that place is the 'master' branch and we take a long > time, then we can't really release any bug fixes to the v0 series in the > meantime. > > I can think of a few workarounds, but they all seem kinda bad. For > example, we could put all the breaking changes together in one commit, > or we could do all this prep in github. > > My question is, is there a correct way to stage breaking changes in > Gerrit? Has some other team already dealt with this problem? > [...]
It sounds like a case where we could use a feature branch. There have been a number of them in the past when people wanted to incrementally work on new features without affecting master, and at first glance (haha) it sounds appropriate here. Infra team, thoughts ? -- Thierry Carrez (ttx) _______________________________________________ OpenStack-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
