jean-frederic clere wrote:
> Mark Thomas wrote:
>> Jim Jagielski wrote:
>>
>> - There is only one dev branch. I am -1 for creating separate dev
>> branches for 3.3.x, 4.1.x, 5.0.x and 5.5.x on the grounds it is too much
>> overhead for branches that are in maintenance mode where 99% of the
>> patches will be ported from 6.x
>
> Apache httpd works that way. In case a patch can't fit in mail use
> people.apache.org to store the patch to review.
What we typically do at httpd;
1. Patch trunk (CTR).
2. Prepare patches to desired release branches to which the trunk commit
diff wouldn't apply cleanly, with a minimum of fuzz.
3. Propose a backport to current release branch(es) (e.g. to version n.n,
n.n-1, n.n-2 etc). This happens in each released branches' STATUS file.
4. Wait to collect 3+1's. Compensate for any objections in the meantime.
Sometimes, withdraw the backport proposal and jump back to step 1. above
and proceed with a fresh patch.
How far back that goes depends on how broad the bug was, if it represents
a fix or new feature, how ABI neutral the change is, etc.
There is one especially nice side effect. Rather than waiting for the
release of the next version to review; the trunk changes which are proposed
for backport get extra scrutiny while they are fresh in the contributors'
mind. (How many of us have had to reconstruct why we choose to do something
in a specific manner, months or years later, before +1'ing a suggested change
to the code we wrote?)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
