We are making some progress.
While I do agree with this: “I think projects should have autonomy over when
branches are created.”.
I also think it is up to the release project to set the projects with the
latest date to do it if they want to participate in any given release. I think
that’s essentially what we are trying to tune and optimize for everyone in this
dialog.
/ Chris
On 13/09/16 16:10, "Dave Neary" <opnfv-tech-discuss-boun...@lists.opnfv.org on
behalf of dne...@redhat.com> wrote:
Hi,
On 09/13/2016 06:42 AM, Frank Brockners (fbrockne) wrote:
> one thing that we’ve not closed on in the discussion last Tuesday is the
> stable-branching milestone. Per what Morgan and I elaborated on:
> Branching occurs a lot of unnecessary overhead for projects which have a
> single development stream only. Hence I’d like to propose that
>
> · the branching milestones **prior** to the release should
> **only** be applied to projects which do parallel development.
>
> · All other projects would branch on the release date – so that we
> have a proper maintenance branch.
>
> Thoughts?
I'm in favour of anything that removes process overhead from projects -
I think projects should have autonomy over when branches are created.
Thanks,
Dave.
--
Dave Neary - NFV/SDN Community Strategy
Open Source and Standards, Red Hat - http://community.redhat.com
Ph: +1-978-399-2182 / Cell: +1-978-799-3338
_______________________________________________
opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list
opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss
_______________________________________________
opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list
opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss
