X-Authentication-Warning: delorie.com: mail set sender to geda-user-bounces using -f X-Recipient: geda-user AT delorie DOT com DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple; d=mail.ud03.udmedia.de; h= message-id:date:from:mime-version:to:cc:subject:references :in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; s=beta; bh= MZ0F61ec0GN8A8/xdwGcY3sg+KcBIZJAWnzdS+knhcA=; b=OSglE8duV7r2R0Md TT5ySLdn8vNS6QzISHIbh0J2gWqiE06wQnsS1zMZC+i+YfHHdlx30Thz4pm0y9X8 3NXSLckHLl3oIdFdTaY2XMOjqOTJGFTdk+/LGxBBgeRTFxUSLoDYhyKrOCcD9xPS HRFNncDXZh31Yhs63hTMACvv+Hs= Message-ID: <50AB6DA2.4010901@jump-ing.de> Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2012 12:46:42 +0100 From: Markus Hitter User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:16.0) Gecko/20121028 Thunderbird/16.0.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: geda-user AT delorie DOT com CC: Levente Subject: Re: [geda-user] branches References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Reply-To: geda-user AT delorie DOT com Am 20.11.2012 11:24, schrieb Levente: > How the branches are treated? If we make some commit to the stable-1.8 > will it ever be merged to the master? If you can commit to the stable-1.8 branch, you can also commit to the master branch. Unless I miss something :-) > When do we fork a new branch? For my part I do this whenever I'm not sure code should go to the master branch. Making a branch is cheap, you can cherry-pick to other branches, you can rebase branches to follow other branches and delete them if they're no longer needed. For example, recently a few branches specific to single bugs appeared in the pcb repo. They help others to test code changes and will (I guess so) go away when the bug is fixed. > If we make a change to the master, how they going to go to the stable-x.y > branch? Either the stable-x.y branch is rebased to a more recent commit of the master branch or it is cherry-picked to there. I think some of the more experienced gEDA developers have some strategy with branches created to do releases. There are these "next-stable-release" and "next-feature-release" tags on Launchpad. I'd like to hear about that strategy, too. In my own projects I always release by tagging the master branch, no release branches happen. IMHO, there's no point in trying to keep two branches stable and code known to be a regression risk shouldn't go to the master branch. Markus -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dipl. Ing. (FH) Markus Hitter http://www.jump-ing.de/