openjpa-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Patrick Linskey" <plins...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: merging to 1.0.x
Date Wed, 19 Sep 2007 18:12:52 GMT
I don't think that you are misinterpreting it. Also, I don't think
that we've done anything that's bad yet; I just thought it'd be good
to discuss to make sure we're all on the same page.

Personally, I do not much like the idea of porting all of my changes
to multiple branches every time I change something. That definitely
discourages me from making fixes.

During the release process, we decided that it was not the
responsibility of the release builder to merge changes made in an
x.y.z branch back to the trunk. I think that where we arrived was that
it should instead be the responsibility of the developers to get the
code to wherever they deemed it belonged, under the assumption that
the x.y.z branches would never pick up changes or merge back down in a
bulk / automated manner.

For example, I've made some fixes that I thought were important enough
to do the svn merge to the branch, and I've made some that I didn't
think were really that important. You may have subsequently moved some
of those to the branch (I haven't checked that closely); that's great,
since presumably you thought that the changes were important enough to
spend the time on.

To sum up, I think it's important that we not destabilize the
branches, but other than that, we should feel free, but not obligated,
to put fixes into trunk and relevant branches. But we must remember
that there is no process in place to move changes only made in a
branch back to the trunk.

-Patrick

On 9/19/07, Kevin Sutter <kwsutter@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Patrick,
> It seemed like a lot of "fixes" were going into the 1.1.0 release and not
> making it back into the 1.0.x release.  Since it seemed like it might be a
> while before we develop enough new feature content to warrant a bump from
> 1.0.0 to 1.1.0, I think it would be worthwhile to keep 1.0.x up-to-date as
> far as fixes are concerned.  I had done a quick JIRA query and found that we
> had close to a dozen fixes in the 1.1.0 release that had not made it back to
> the 1.0.x release.  Reading through the JIRA reports, the problems sounded
> like plain old defects and not new features.  I started to move some of the
> changes back to the 1.0.x release and then Mike started to help out.
>
> So, from a release maintenance viewpoint, I would like us to be more
> diligent with ensuring that defect fixes make it back into the current
> maintenance release (as well as trunk).  Of course, there may be reasons why
> this may not make sense due to the extent of the changes, but so far the
> changes have been pretty minimal.  The most extensive change is with the
> Java 2 security changes at this point.
>
> If I am misinterpreting the x.y.z release conventions, then let's discuss
> that.
>
> Thanks,
> Kevin
>
> On 9/18/07, Patrick Linskey <plinskey@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > It seems like we've had a lot of activity merging things to the 1.0.x
> > branch. Personally, it seems like there's maybe even too much stuff
> > going into there; what is our plan for QA for the changes in the 1.0.1
> > release at this point?
> >
> > Also, a lot of the @since tags are now wrong, since they were written
> > with 1.1.0 in mind, but now the changes are slated for 1.0.1.
> >
> > Thoughts?
> >
> > -Patrick
> >
> > --
> > Patrick Linskey
> > 202 669 5907
> >
>


-- 
Patrick Linskey
202 669 5907

Mime
View raw message