Hi Luke,
On Wed, 2012-12-12 at 20:00 +1100, Luke Deller wrote:
Newbie developer question: what is the convention around here for
backporting fixes to branches?
Good question :-)
I see that the 3.6 release plan in wiki says "only important bug fixes",
but what counts as important ? If a fix seems moderately important to me
do I just repost my patch to gerrit against the release branch (perhaps
a few days after it was committed to master to let it settle), and see
if the reviewer agrees it is important?
Sounds reasonable to me - of course there is always a balance of risk
vs. importance. If the risk is tiny then assuming someone wants to
review it it doesn't matter how mind-burningly useful it is - that you
want it included is prolly enough. Conversely if it is a -300+1000 line
patch that is mostly a random re-factor then - we think harder :-)
What about if my fix is not burningly important, but it seems small and
safe - is that something I should resubmit for a release branch too?
Why not; of course for the -3-6 branch you'd need a review by someone
else to get it included. For 4.0 bug fixes can be committed directly
without review; if you're a gerrit user anyway there should be ~no
difference :-)
Does that help ?
Thanks !
Michael.
--
michael.meeks@suse.com <><, Pseudo Engineer, itinerant idiot
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.