3:18 a.m.
Hi,
I have some 4.2.1 bugs I want to start working on, but I don't want them
getting into 4.2.0 GA. What should I do?
Best wishes,
Greg
--
GREG SHEREMETA
SENIOR SOFTWARE ENGINEER - TEAM LEAD - RHV UX
Red Hat NA
<https://www.redhat.com/>
gshereme(a)redhat.com IRC: gshereme
<https://red.ht/sig>
10:25 a.m.
On Fri, Dec 1, 2017 at 3:18 AM, Greg Sheremeta <gshereme(a)redhat.com> wrote:
Hi,
I have some 4.2.1 bugs I want to start working on, but I don't want them
getting into 4.2.0 GA. What should I do?
Best wishes,
Greg
You can work on them all right, but until we have an rc branch, you should
not have them merged.
I believe that an rc branch would be created after rc1 is built (which is
now delayed for the 4th day).
2:06 p.m.
On Fri, Dec 1, 2017 at 3:25 AM, Dan Kenigsberg <danken(a)redhat.com> wrote:
On Fri, Dec 1, 2017 at 3:18 AM, Greg Sheremeta
<gshereme(a)redhat.com>
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I have some 4.2.1 bugs I want to start working on, but I don't want them
> getting into 4.2.0 GA. What should I do?
>
> Best wishes,
> Greg
>
You can work on them all right, but until we have an rc branch, you should
not have them merged.
I believe that an rc branch would be created after rc1 is built (which is
now delayed for the 4th day).
Ok, makes sense. But even after the rc is built and safe, there's always a
chance of us needing another rc before 4.2 GA. So isn't it the case that
nothing for 4.2.1 should be merged until the GA branch is created (if
there's such a thing, or is that the rc branch you refer to)?
I know this was discussed in a meeting, but I guess I'm a proponent of
branching 4.2 off master completely at this point. We (UX team) have some
4.3 items I think we could start on, too.
Leaving a bunch of patches sitting in gerrit introduces risks of them not
working when they all get rebased, and we're also missing out on OST.
10:08 p.m.
On Fri, Dec 1, 2017 at 2:06 PM, Greg Sheremeta <gshereme(a)redhat.com> wrote:
On Fri, Dec 1, 2017 at 3:25 AM, Dan Kenigsberg <danken(a)redhat.com> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Dec 1, 2017 at 3:18 AM, Greg Sheremeta <gshereme(a)redhat.com>
> wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I have some 4.2.1 bugs I want to start working on, but I don't want them
>> getting into 4.2.0 GA. What should I do?
>>
>> Best wishes,
>> Greg
>
>
> You can work on them all right, but until we have an rc branch, you should
> not have them merged.
> I believe that an rc branch would be created after rc1 is built (which is
> now delayed for the 4th day).
>
Ok, makes sense. But even after the rc is built and safe, there's always a
chance of us needing another rc before 4.2 GA. So isn't it the case that
nothing for 4.2.1 should be merged until the GA branch is created (if
there's such a thing, or is that the rc branch you refer to)?
I know this was discussed in a meeting, but I guess I'm a proponent of
branching 4.2 off master completely at this point. We (UX team) have some
4.3 items I think we could start on, too.
Leaving a bunch of patches sitting in gerrit introduces risks of them not
working when they all get rebased, and we're also missing out on OST.
People in my team have plenty of 4.2 bugs to work on (17 bugs, few
RFEs) and no urgent 4.3 tasks, so for us, branching out 4.2 means
double the backports.
However, we have 0 bugs for 4.2.0, so I am a proponent of branching
out 4.2.0-rc now (but that may mean a lot of headache for CI team).
10:25 p.m.
We are in very similar situation. We have bugs for 4.2.x that are more
urgent than what we currently have for 4.3. Including bugs where we
already know we will be doing the 4.2.z backport.
Martin
On Fri, Dec 1, 2017 at 9:08 PM, Dan Kenigsberg <danken(a)redhat.com> wrote:
On Fri, Dec 1, 2017 at 2:06 PM, Greg Sheremeta
<gshereme(a)redhat.com> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Dec 1, 2017 at 3:25 AM, Dan Kenigsberg <danken(a)redhat.com> wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, Dec 1, 2017 at 3:18 AM, Greg Sheremeta <gshereme(a)redhat.com>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> I have some 4.2.1 bugs I want to start working on, but I don't want them
>>> getting into 4.2.0 GA. What should I do?
>>>
>>> Best wishes,
>>> Greg
>>
>>
>> You can work on them all right, but until we have an rc branch, you should
>> not have them merged.
>> I believe that an rc branch would be created after rc1 is built (which is
>> now delayed for the 4th day).
>>
>
> Ok, makes sense. But even after the rc is built and safe, there's always a
> chance of us needing another rc before 4.2 GA. So isn't it the case that
> nothing for 4.2.1 should be merged until the GA branch is created (if
> there's such a thing, or is that the rc branch you refer to)?
>
> I know this was discussed in a meeting, but I guess I'm a proponent of
> branching 4.2 off master completely at this point. We (UX team) have some
> 4.3 items I think we could start on, too.
>
> Leaving a bunch of patches sitting in gerrit introduces risks of them not
> working when they all get rebased, and we're also missing out on OST.
>
People in my team have plenty of 4.2 bugs to work on (17 bugs, few
RFEs) and no urgent 4.3 tasks, so for us, branching out 4.2 means
double the backports.
However, we have 0 bugs for 4.2.0, so I am a proponent of branching
out 4.2.0-rc now (but that may mean a lot of headache for CI team).
_______________________________________________
Devel mailing list
Devel(a)ovirt.org
http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
2544
days inactive
2544
days old
4 comments
3 participants
participants (3)
-
Dan Kenigsberg -
Greg Sheremeta -
Martin Sivak