Ãvar ArnfjÃrà Bjarmason <avarab@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
> Is there a reason for why this didn't get picked up other than falling
> through the cracks?
Simply because I wasn't actively collecting new topics during feature
freeze, especially for small stuff that I knew that resending after
release would be trivial and more efficient use of my time than queuing it
in 'pu' and having to look at it every time I do another push-out in order
to decide when to merge it to 'next'.
After a feature release like 1.7.3, my preference is to do these in this
order:
(0) take a deep breath and have bit of break ;-);
(1) rewind 'next' to match 1.7.3 with selected topics that has been
cooking there, rename 'maint' to 'maint-1.7.2', and start 'maint' at
1.7.3;
(2) have a quiet period for at least a few days, not touching 'master' at
all, to make sure things are stable, giving users time to give us
feedback, and giving us time to assess potential damages caused by
unanticipated regressions;
(3) collect brown-paper-bag regression fixes, if necessary, during the
period overlapping with (2), queuing them to 'next';
(4) have (3) graduate and issue 1.7.3.1 out of 'maint';
And after all that, open the 1.7.4 cycle, queuing new topics. That would
also be a good time to backmerge the safe fixes (but not new features)
that went to 1.7.3 to maint-1.7.2, and cut 1.7.2.4, so that it will be a
reasonably solid base to apply later security fixes if necessary.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html