[Releasing] rethinking the branching scheme

[Poenitz Andre]

Thiago Macieira [thiago.macieira at intel.com] wrote:
> Em qua 19 fev 2014, às 15:19:08, Frederik Gladhorn escreveu:
> > 5. See Ossi's mail. It didn't work. Merging in branches in two directions
> > with  the amount of changes we have is just not very practical. We work
> > around the problem with locking branches and doing fast forward merges from
> > dev->stable for example, but this is a huge issue and would be improved by
> > the branching system suggested. This is a real problem for the release team
> > and whoever else gets involved. The good thing is that this is mostly
> > people working at Digia and does not effect people contributing on their
> > spare time. I could still imagine spending our (my) time in a more
> > productive way.
> 
> Which is also part of the issue: no one outside of Digia knows how difficult
> this is, so no one can offer suggestions on improving the workflow or knows what
> to do or not do to keep the pain level low.

Ossi's proposal was aiming at reducing pain. We barely can release
any version of Qt, let alone do that on a deterministic schedule 
in the current process.

> [...]
> In fact, why isn't anybody suggesting we de-modularise? 

Now that you mention it:
<ossi> mail posted
<andre_> nice one.
<andre_> a follow up titled "Rethinking the modularization scheme" might be in order. 
You could cut&paste some text ;-|
<ossi> nah, we'll address that with the CI improvements discussed before.
 that wouldn't have fully addressed the branching problem, hence the current proposal

Andre'