Hi Kendy, On Mon, 30 May 2011 18:07:34 +0200 Jan Holesovsky <ke...@suse.cz> wrote:
> So - as long as you don't force people to do this [ie. don't force > this as a rule, but instead let them decide if they are willing to > wait for the merge of the branch into the master (working mostly on > the branch before the release), or whether they prefer to cherry-pick > whatever direction], I am fine. I cant force anybody whom I dont hand the paycheck (an even then that would have limits). ;) It is more about having a general recommendation on how to work. You are always free to do it different, but you should not blame anyone if things go wrong then. If there is no clear recommendation, you will just end up with people missing some commits on either branch and doing emergency cherrypicks, not helping clarity either. The more people are working on the release branch directly, even for critical fixes, the more people will be tempted to do the same for noncritical stuff, creating additional review work. Also: 3.3.3 codefreezed today with another ~35 most likely rather important commits. Are those merged back to master (or manually checked)? Are we sure all of them are obsolete for both master and 3-4? With patches and commits flying all directions between the currently open branches master, 3-4, 3-4-0 and 3-3 things are not exactly lucid. Best, Bjoern -- https://launchpad.net/~bjoern-michaelsen _______________________________________________ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
