I've discovered an important bug in our branch strategy that we need to
address! What is written below is incorrect, and it led to an issue
today. I have made a task to document the correct strategy[0], but in
the meantime I wanted to get the word out here.
The really important thing to note is th
FWIW, we loosely modeled our branching strategy after this post:
http://nvie.com/posts/a-successful-git-branching-model/
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
Pulp-list mailing list
Pulp-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailma
On 09/09/2014 08:04 AM, Ivan Necas wrote:
> This sound like a lot of merging.
It is, but it will also be very infrequent as we are doing little to no
work on 2.4 in the medium and long term.
> How one figures out what should go to the master and what to 2.5?
At this point, 2.5 is feature frozen
- Original Message -
> Hi Pulp developers! I have just created our 2.5.x branches for us to
> work in. Below, I will list each of our branches of importance, and what
> they are for. Feel free to ask questions if you need clarification!
>
> 2.4-testing
> This branch is currently where al
Hi Pulp developers! I have just created our 2.5.x branches for us to
work in. Below, I will list each of our branches of importance, and what
they are for. Feel free to ask questions if you need clarification!
2.4-testing
This branch is currently where all 2.4.1 bugs should be branched from
and me
