On Sep 22, 2012, at 10:54 PM, Mark A. Hershberger <m...@everybody.org> wrote:
> On 09/22/2012 02:50 PM, Krinkle wrote: >> On Sep 21, 2012, at 4:13 PM, Mark A. Hershberger <m...@everybody.org> wrote: >>> That commit is not included. I can merge it in or make a second RC with >>> 1.20wmf12. >>> >>> What do you think is the better way to go? >> >> I'd say re-branch from master. > > My thinking was to branch from a point that was known -- something whose > issues we knew. I think this worked pretty well. > > For instance, the issue Niklas raised was because I used a WMF branch. > > I'm now thinking that I'll just stick with the 1.20wmf12 and just apply > the patch he pointed to. This is in the vein of sticking to known issues. > > What do you think? > > Mark. I think master is more stable then whatever wmf branch. I know because of commits recently merged and whatnot. If there are problems we'll find them in the release candidate period. And by that time we'll have had a new wmf branch as well to see how the latest code performs on wmf. Also, this bugzilla query should be empty before release as well (either by fixing bugs, or reviewing/merging pending commits that claim to fix stuff, or deferring the bug to a later release etc.). People assign and block things usually for a reason: https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/buglist.cgi?query_format=advanced&target_milestone=1.20.0%20release&product=MediaWiki&resolution=--- -- Krinkle _______________________________________________ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
