Date: prev next · Thread: first prev next last
2011 Archives by date, by thread · List index


On Mon, 2011-05-23 at 14:56 +0200, Bjoern Michaelsen wrote:
On Mon, 23 May 2011 06:39:52 -0600
"Tor Lillqvist" <tlillqvist@novell.com>
wrote:

Well, the policy, at least as some of us (me included) have
understood it, was that the development branch gets merged into
master regularly, so no need to commit fixes to both. But yeah, it
does now seem safer to commit to both the development branch and
master, to avoid exactly this kind of situation.

Always commit to master, cherrypick to release, to be precise. Usually
you would need to have reviews for release anyway, so pushing to master
spares you the patch generation, as you can just post a link.

Note that the this review process started with the RC phase, and during
the Beta phase review was not required.  Plus, patch generation is super
easy since all it takes is git format-patch -1 & send it off as an
attachment.  Of course YMMV, but pushing to master, going to the cgit
page and copy-n-pasting the link is not necessarily easier.

Kohei

-- 
Kohei Yoshida, LibreOffice hacker, Calc
<kyoshida@novell.com>


Context


Privacy Policy | Impressum (Legal Info) | Copyright information: Unless otherwise specified, all text and images on this website are licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License. This does not include the source code of LibreOffice, which is licensed under the Mozilla Public License (MPLv2). "LibreOffice" and "The Document Foundation" are registered trademarks of their corresponding registered owners or are in actual use as trademarks in one or more countries. Their respective logos and icons are also subject to international copyright laws. Use thereof is explained in our trademark policy.