impala-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Tim Armstrong <>
Subject Re: Branch model discussion
Date Tue, 07 Jun 2016 16:49:14 GMT
What would happen if we discover that a tagged release has a critical bug
that was missed by the test cases? Would we have a release branch to
stabilise the release with any critical fixes?

Initially we probably don't need to do this, but I just want to make sure
that we pick a release model that will also work if we need to put more
effort into stabilising releases.

Were you thinking of the scenario where we're trying to stabilise a release
on trunk at the same time as a major feature is in development? I'm not a
big fan of long-lived feature branches: I think it's a last resort if
changes can't be staged in trunk in a sensible non-breaking way.

On Tue, Jun 7, 2016 at 8:59 AM, Jim Apple <> wrote:

> How should Impala branches be a manged?
> Today, most of our new development happens on trunk, except when a CDH
> release is imminent. I propose we move to a time-based release model,
> where development happens on the "master" branch and every N weeks a
> commit that is passing all of the tests is tagged with a version
> number.
> Then we can do an actual release:
> For big breaking changes, we could keep two branches around
> corresponding to the two versions currently being developed on.
> Thoughts?

  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message