Hi,
anonym wrote (02 Apr 2014 15:47:33 GMT) :
> 20/03/14 12:00, intrigeri wrote:
>> So, I propose we merge feature/wheezy into the devel and experimental
>> branches, and use these branches (as usual) to prepare the next major
>> release. Then, feature/wheezy can simply be ignored from now on.
> Do you intend this merge to happen the normal way or as an exception,
> i.e. just merge without a review before? I some how got that impression.
> If so, I wouldn't be against it to get things rolling quickly (in
> particular that new branches get based on it), as a proper review may
> take some time given the branche's size, and that I (the supposed
> reviewer) isn't terribly familiar with the branch yet.
I wanted to just merge it myself. The review can happen later.
>> Also, until now I've been freely pushing stuff to feature/wheezy,
>> without going through our usual review'n'merge process. I think it's
>> great time to stop that. So, I propose that when working on 1.1, we
>> now use feature branches forked off the (Wheezy-based) devel branch,
>> and go through the usual review and merge process.
>>
>> Does this all make sense for you?
> Yes. While painful, now seems to be the time for this unavoidable step.
Good.
> However, just to make it clear (even though you haven't suggested
> anything like it), let's *not* do it for e.g. the Tails Greeter Git
> repo, only for the Tails Git repo. Otherwise there will be complications
> for the work on the 1.0 release.
OK.
>> I've got two additional questions, mainly for anonym (with his RM
>> hat):
>>
>> * do you think you can take care, in a timely manner, of the many
>> review'n'merge requests that will be sent if we go this way?
> Starting next week, yes. I will have to prioritise my RM work for the
> 1.0 release, obviously, but I promise to not neglect work on this front.
Great.
>> * could you please review the current devel..feature/wheezy delta,
>> as a starting point? ETA?
> A quick count say that it's 273 commits, so any help reviewing this
> (like Alan offered) is welcome, although I'm unsure how it can be
> divided. Unless someone proposes something smart I'll just do it all; an
> independent review by someone else would still be quite beneficial.
I think one of you can review until f76856 (included), and the other
can start on the next commit.
> For an ETA I'd first need to know how the actual merge is gonna happen,
> per my earlier question.
Now answered :)
Cheers!
--
intrigeri
| GnuPG key @ https://gaffer.ptitcanardnoir.org/intrigeri/intrigeri.asc
| OTR fingerprint @ https://gaffer.ptitcanardnoir.org/intrigeri/otr.asc
