Mailing-List: contact dev-help@cordova.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@cordova.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of agrieve@google.com designates
 209.85.214.181 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Sender: agrieve@google.com
In-Reply-To: <CD19BDD4.158A2%fil@adobe.com>
References: 
 <CADVgkyMZmhcc8RbLNyNXi3cJ9iM=h9ScvU2ZnET3X4q9L95V1w@mail.gmail.com>
 <CD19BDD4.158A2%fil@adobe.com>
From: Andrew Grieve <agrieve@chromium.org>
Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2013 17:02:13 -0500
Message-ID: 
 <CABiQX1WbsVx9W5DaxN-77_x5RAOHSodnsiRPxURzCgQLqMjXCQ@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: too long to package a release?
To: dev <dev@cordova.apache.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=e89a8f9218ee6620fe04d346cd1b

--e89a8f9218ee6620fe04d346cd1b
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

On Mon, Jan 14, 2013 at 4:54 PM, Filip Maj <fil@adobe.com> wrote:

>
> >But do Canonical branches merge into each other? I'm thinking no.
>
> My understanding:
>
> - work goes into feature branches
> - when contributor(s) deem feature is ready, merge into Unstable, which
> then gets vetted (test!!!!!)
> - at some point unstable merges into Next
> - when tagging, we merge Next into Stable and tag
>

That's my understanding as well.

The "At some point" part would be when we say "hey, let's start working on
cutting a release", which should align with the wiki's
RoadMap<http://wiki.apache.org/cordova/RoadmapProjects> (which
targeted 2.3 for November, whoops!).


>
> Would be different for bug fixes or other maintenance-type commits too,
> ya? Those would be directly into Next.
>
It might cause headaches to commit bug-fixes into Next when it comes time
to merge Unstable -> Next.


>
> Finally, what about hot fixes / patch releases? Branch off the tag in
> Stable and put hot patch work into there?
>
Agree. I think the flow here should be to commit change to Unstable and
then cherry-pick it into a branch off the tag (when feasible).

--e89a8f9218ee6620fe04d346cd1b--