> What I meant was that we'd have the product/release branch and, at most, > one of the alpha/beta/rc branches open at any given time. > > Taking f13-branch as an example, I was thinking that f13-branch would > continually accept patches. Currently, we'd be applying patches to > f13-branch and only alpha blocker fixes to f13-alpha-branch. Once > f13-alpha ships, we're done with f13-alpha-branch -- it's now a snapshot > of the alpha for what that's worth. Once we decide to tighten up for the > beta, we'd make f13-beta-branch. > > Does that make things any clearer? Only marginally. How does master fit into this picture, and when do we create the f13-branch? From your description above, it sounds like we'd be creating f13-branch very early on and doing development on that. I'd like to firm all this stuff up (including being able to tie phrases like "decide to tighten up for the beta" to a point in the Fedora schedule), perhaps describe some rules for what gets committed where, document it on a wiki page, and then blast through this backlog of crud that we've got accumulating here. - Chris _______________________________________________ Anaconda-devel-list mailing list Anaconda-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/anaconda-devel-list
