On Fri, Jan 05, 2018 at 11:53:50AM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote: > > They haven't even been reviewed yet. If they get good feedback, then the > > maintainer will pick them up, then merge them to 'next', and then > > eventually to 'master', after which they'd become part of the next > > major release. For a pure bug-fix, it may instead go to 'maint' and > > become part of the next minor release. > > Even a pure bug-fix, unless it is something no longer needed on the > 'master' front, goes thru 'pu'->'next'->'master' avenue first, and > is recorded in the RelNotes with the notes like "(merge d45420c1c8 > jk/abort-clone-with-existing-dest later to maint)" when it happens. > > side note: in fact "grep -e 'later to maint' RelNotes" is > how I remind myself what to merge down to 'maint'; the > actual procedure is a bit more involved (those interested in > the details can find the 'ML' script on the 'todo' branch; > its name stands for 'merge later') > > Later, after not hearing from people that the "fix" breaks things, > the topic is also mreged to 'maint' and becomes part of the next > minor release. Out of curiosity, did this change at some point? I thought the process used to be to merge to maint, and then pick up topics in master by merging maint to master. -Peff
