Le 22/09/2012 09:19, Lukas Kahwe Smith a écrit :
On 21.09.2012, at 08:45, Fabien Potencier
<[email protected]> wrote:
* merging 2.0 into 2.1 is a major PITA (just for me actually) as all the tests
were moved in 2.1, and because the form framework evolved a lot as well, so it
takes me more and more time to merge 2.0 into 2.1;
* we can decide to keep the 2 months period but still accept security fixes for
a longer period of time (6 months).
we talked about changing the merging policy in Denver. ie. we would merge bug
fixes to master and then merge it down ro previous releases. i dont remember
the pros and cons we listes back then. but it might become more necessary to
enable delegation of responsibility.
regards,
Lukas
The big issue with this workflow is that it forces to use cherry-pick
for older branches instead of merging them together. So changes are
applied in the maintenance branch but with a different commit hash.
This is what Doctrine does and it makes it impossible to ask git which
commits have been backported (a diff will show the commits being new in
master even if they have a cherry-picked version). It requires doing the
history diff by hand each time.
--
Christophe | Stof
--
If you want to report a vulnerability issue on symfony, please send it to
security at symfony-project.com
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "symfony developers" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected]
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/symfony-devs?hl=en
