From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by olra.theworths.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 189C5431FD0 for ; Sun, 3 Jul 2011 07:30:50 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at olra.theworths.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.799 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.799 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7] autolearn=disabled Received: from olra.theworths.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (olra.theworths.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id zdo2DCWQAHLX for ; Sun, 3 Jul 2011 07:30:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-pz0-f53.google.com (mail-pz0-f53.google.com [209.85.210.53]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by olra.theworths.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9B5C6431FB6 for ; Sun, 3 Jul 2011 07:30:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: by pzk6 with SMTP id 6so2489179pzk.26 for ; Sun, 03 Jul 2011 07:30:47 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=hVhHYCTcdYeWPYcdE2rziPsqR8woZvr0bF8O5kqvrPM=; b=D3E+zlzxgzl10vx1eXcQ6n0n7ifdTGO1VP12PaiDgt+/9vQPlke7f/utHrBMOPJPTs 5d2tSOjdC9BC7stbtPe4qffZHl5ohdzaKo3C24tQfTfUwo07qOzSHBcRnYRBmCHy2Lex q38/moOr+NpbfXglfzbdQ3GJR+VB2fVvbnef0= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.68.58.229 with SMTP id u5mr6463221pbq.233.1309703447697; Sun, 03 Jul 2011 07:30:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.68.43.170 with HTTP; Sun, 3 Jul 2011 07:30:47 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <87mxgv5yuc.fsf@zancas.localnet> References: <87y60hn0mg.fsf@zancas.localnet> <87r568yhq5.fsf@zancas.localnet> <87mxgv5yuc.fsf@zancas.localnet> Date: Sun, 3 Jul 2011 10:30:47 -0400 Message-ID: Subject: Re: branchs and tags and merges oh my! From: servilio To: David Bremner Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Cc: notmuch@notmuchmail.org X-BeenThere: notmuch@notmuchmail.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13 Precedence: list List-Id: "Use and development of the notmuch mail system." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 03 Jul 2011 14:30:50 -0000 On 3 July 2011 08:32, David Bremner wrote: > On Sat, 2 Jul 2011 15:23:02 -0500, Jed Brown wrote: > >> Remind me of why bugfix patches can't (usually) be applied to the >> release branch first, then merged into master? > > Yes, that might work out for a "release" consisting of one or two > critical patches, and happening more or less instantly. =C2=A0But maybe i= t > makes sense to make more of an effort to do (some of) the release > specific commits first on release and then merging to master, rather > than cherry-picking everything during a freeze. If by "a freeze" you mean freezing Carl's working branch, I agree, that work is better done in different branch so no restriction is imposed on Carl workflow. > In that case we obviously need to merge release back to master. =C2=A0If = we > want to have one long running release branch, this leads to cross > merging between the two branches. > > -----.--------------m------m-------.-- master > =C2=A0 =C2=A0 | =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0^ =C2=A0 = =C2=A0 =C2=A0^ =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0/ > =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0\ =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0/ =C2=A0 = =C2=A0 =C2=A0/______v > =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 \ =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0/ =C2=A0 =C2=A0 = =C2=A0/v > =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0.--------+------+m-------+ > =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A00.6 =C2=A0 =C2=A00= .6.1 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 0.7 > > This is all a bit hypothetical at this point of course, since there has > never been a bug-fix release. But there shouldn't be any issue, any changes done in "release" should be merged back to master as I see it. Servilio