Scott Kostyshak wrote: > On Tue, Mar 07, 2017 at 12:42:10PM -0800, Pavel Sanda wrote: > > Scott Kostyshak wrote: > > > When we branch 2.3, this branch would be named "2.3.x", right? The > > > slightly weird thing would be that the release manager would be in > > > charge of the 2.3.x branch until 2.3.0 and then the stable branch > > > > 2.3.x is good for devs and less good for 2.3 because it gets less attention. > > I don't understand what you mean here. Can you give more details? Do you > mean that if there is a "2.3.x" branch, devs might commit patches that > could be a little risky for 2.3.0, where if there is instead a "2.3.0" > branch, the name makes us be more careful about such patches?
My understanding was that you propose to have master and 2.3.x which will later become 2.3.0. People generally like more to develop new stuff rather than focus on stabilizing the code, so having both master and 2.3.x will divide attention and perhaps more to the favor of 2.3.x. So if I was responsible for 2.3.0 I would try to fix 2.3.x==master as long as possible ;) But not really my call now... > > OTOH if the manager is sloppy with deadlines people get very frustrated > > about > > the freeze and that is not good either. > > +1 > > > Anyway I think that the manager should have major word in decisions like > > this > > because he will have the burden/responsibility for whatever decision is > > taken. > > > > So let's get to the point: Are you willing to be release manager for 2.3? > > Yes. > > My main hesitation is that there are several parts of LyX's code where I > am completely lost, and that's not a good quality of a release manager. > And when we get to the stage where every commit requires careful review, > I would need more help from others than a more experienced developer. I My take on this is that release manager responsibility is to set and publish deadlines and push people who are responsible for their area of expertise to fix or stabilize that in reasonable time. So it's more of understanding whom to trust in which area rather than understanding the code. > So yes, I am willing to be the release manager, but I am also willing to > have a more knowledgeable developer as the release manager if one > volunteers. Easy. Is any other dev thinking about trying the release managment for 2.3? We can wait couple days and see whether someone has feeling of doing it. Pavel
