day 10 December 2014 10:17 PM, Suresh Sadhu wrote:
+1
-Original Message-
From: Rajani Karuturi [mailto:raj...@apache.org]
Sent: 10 December 2014 06:20
To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Simplify CloudMonkey's branching/maintenance process
+1
On Tue, Dec 9, 2014 at 1
+1
-Original Message-
From: Rajani Karuturi [mailto:raj...@apache.org]
Sent: 10 December 2014 06:20
To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Simplify CloudMonkey's branching/maintenance process
+1
On Tue, Dec 9, 2014 at 18:55 PM, Rohit Yadav
wrote:
Hi,
CloudMonkey&
On tir. 9. des. 2014 at 14.27 Rohit Yadav wrote:
> Hi,
>
> CloudMonkey's git repo history is mostly linear and the work on master
> is simply getting synced on 5.3 branch. I want to ask the community if
> anyone has any objections on just keeping master as the working branch
> and have branches w
+1, keep it simple
> On 10-Dec-2014, at 4:21 am, Daan Hoogland wrote:
>
> +1 , I wish we could make such a call on the stack.
>
> On Tue, Dec 9, 2014 at 7:14 PM, sebgoa wrote:
>>
>> On Dec 9, 2014, at 2:25 PM, Rohit Yadav wrote:
>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> CloudMonkey's git repo history is mostly linea
+1
On Tuesday, December 9, 2014, Rajani Karuturi wrote:
> +1
>
>
> On Tue, Dec 9, 2014 at 18:55 PM, Rohit Yadav >
> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> CloudMonkey's git repo history is mostly linear and the work on master
> is simply getting synced on 5.3 branch. I want to ask the community if
> anyone has any
+1
On Tue, Dec 9, 2014 at 18:55 PM, Rohit Yadav
wrote:
Hi,
CloudMonkey's git repo history is mostly linear and the work on master
is simply getting synced on 5.3 branch. I want to ask the community if
anyone has any objections on just keeping master as the working branch
and have branches when
+1, it makes sense for cloudmonkey :)
On 9 December 2014 at 22:51, Daan Hoogland wrote:
> +1 , I wish we could make such a call on the stack.
>
> On Tue, Dec 9, 2014 at 7:14 PM, sebgoa wrote:
> >
> > On Dec 9, 2014, at 2:25 PM, Rohit Yadav
> wrote:
> >
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> CloudMonkey's git repo
+1 , I wish we could make such a call on the stack.
On Tue, Dec 9, 2014 at 7:14 PM, sebgoa wrote:
>
> On Dec 9, 2014, at 2:25 PM, Rohit Yadav wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> CloudMonkey's git repo history is mostly linear and the work on master
>> is simply getting synced on 5.3 branch. I want to ask the
On Dec 9, 2014, at 2:25 PM, Rohit Yadav wrote:
> Hi,
>
> CloudMonkey's git repo history is mostly linear and the work on master
> is simply getting synced on 5.3 branch. I want to ask the community if
> anyone has any objections on just keeping master as the working branch
> and have branches w
: dev
Subject: [VOTE] Simplify CloudMonkey's branching/maintenance process
Hi,
CloudMonkey's git repo history is mostly linear and the work on master is
simply getting synced on 5.3 branch. I want to ask the community if anyone has
any objections on just keeping master as the working
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 12/09/2014 02:25 PM, Rohit Yadav wrote:
> Hi,
>
> CloudMonkey's git repo history is mostly linear and the work on
> master is simply getting synced on 5.3 branch. I want to ask the
> community if anyone has any objections on just keeping master a
Hi,
CloudMonkey's git repo history is mostly linear and the work on master
is simply getting synced on 5.3 branch. I want to ask the community if
anyone has any objections on just keeping master as the working branch
and have branches when they are needed (say documentation, feature work
etc) and
12 matches
Mail list logo
