> -----Original Message-----
> From: Abdelatif Guettouche <abdelatif.guettou...@gmail.com>
> Sent: Saturday, May 23, 2020 9:18 PM
> To: dev@nuttx.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Release Notes for the NEXT version of NuttX
>
> > Yes, it's better to accumulative all patch for a specific release candidate
> > in an issue/request in the future release, then we can track
> each release more easier.
>
> Commit wise, we would have the same history, or are you suggesting to squash
> all the backported commits?
>
No, the commit still separate as master, but we use one issue/pr track all
cherry-picked patch for a release candidate. And to help track the history,
only the critical bug fix get cherry-picked from master to release branch.
>
> On Sat, May 23, 2020 at 7:40 AM Xiang Xiao <xiaoxiang781...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Nathan Hartman <hartman.nat...@gmail.com>
> > > Sent: Saturday, May 23, 2020 5:11 AM
> > > To: dev@nuttx.apache.org
> > > Subject: Re: Release Notes for the NEXT version of NuttX
> > >
> > > On Fri, May 22, 2020 at 4:54 PM Brennan Ashton
> > > <bash...@brennanashton.com> wrote:
> > > > Nevermind I see what you were asking for. There is no great way to
> > > > do this with git directly, usually you track this by using labels
> > > > (or
> > > > similar) on issues or PRs to aggregate it. At least that is that
> > > > is how I have always run releases for work.
> > >
> > > Ugh, I don't think we've done that. At least, we haven't consistently.
> > >
> > > So, I'm guessing we'll have to take the log since that branch point,
> > > but then manually exclude the commits that were cherry-picked to 9.0?
> > > Sounds like a lot of effort. :-(
> > >
> >
> > Yes, it's better to accumulative all patch for a specific release candidate
> > in an issue/request in the future release, then we can track
> each release more easier.
> >
> > > Nathan
> >
