Hi Rutherther,
Rutherther <ruthert...@ditigal.xyz> writes:
Ian Eure <i...@retrospec.tv> writes:
I think it’s worth considering doing this the other way around:
instead of freezing master, cut a release branch and
cherry-pick
fixes into it as needed. I don’t expect that development on
non-release features will stop during the freeze, which means
we’ll have a large backlog of work to merge once the freeze
ends;
this is a thing Guix has historically not been good at working
through in a timely manner.
A release branch would also support longer-term stable
releases,
if we wanted to do that.
The downside is that it’s more work to cherry-pick fixes
between
branches, and there’s the potential for merge conflicts.
I think that currently this isn't achievable very well. If
release and
master are diverging branches, and they will be if work is in
both of
them, then if users install the system from that, then pull, and
reconfigure,
their forward update check will fail as it expects the new
commit to be
descendant of the old one, and it won't be. That would be
causing confusion.
Hmm, good point, I think you’re right.
-- Ian
