Rockbox mail archiveSubject: Re: rolling stable builds
Re: rolling stable builds
From: Jonathan Gordon <jdgordy_at_gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 19 Oct 2010 14:17:30 +1100
On 19 October 2010 04:09, Amaury Pouly <amaury.pouly_at_gmail.com> wrote:
> I agree that a six month release cycle is a bit long, so I agree that in
> principle, intermediate releases would be good for users.
> What is unclear to me is how we will manage all this. Indeed, some bug fixes
> can be spread among several commits which can in turn require some more
> commits, etc. I think it will not be clear which bugfixes to backport or not
> but let's see and judge later.
> Amaury Pouly
Figuring these details out was the point of this email thread,
unfortunately there hasn't been enough responses.
My view would be that any bugfix for a flyspray task would be a
candidate to go in the stable branch. Fixes which are too fiddly to
backport would probably miss out (or at that point we talk about a new
minor stable build (but 3.7.3 -> 3.8)).
I was really hoping to get more feedback, if no one cares about
talking about it there is a good chance no one will bother with the
work of keeping the stable branch updated and tested and working. This
simply wont work if only a few people look after the branch.
Received on 2010-10-19