[Releasing] rethinking the branching scheme / sha1 proposal
thiago.macieira at intel.com
Wed Feb 19 17:04:28 CET 2014
Em qua 19 fev 2014, às 16:47:55, Simon Hausmann escreveu:
> If the sha1 is randomly picked, then I agree it is counter-productive and
> well, doesn't change anything. Are you worried that it's going to be
> difficult to choose a sha1 for qtbase because it seems the biggest inflow
> of changes from many directions?
I propose we don't pick it at random. Instead, I propose we pick it up at one
very specific CI pass during the weekend of the feature freeze.
If we're very strict, it would be the SHA-1 of the branch at midnight UTC,
whether changes have passed or not. That forces people to get their changes
early and not submit major new features in the week of feature freeze. That's
a positive sign.
We've been somewhat lenient and said that changes that were ready but failed
to integrate due to CI errors not caused by that specific change can retry. If
we want to continue with that, we'd have to handhold the process during the
freeze weekend: retry the CI with *only* what had been approved prior to the
freeze. Any commit requiring a new patchset is automatically off the freeze.
Thiago Macieira - thiago.macieira (AT) intel.com
Software Architect - Intel Open Source Technology Center
More information about the Releasing