[dev] Renaming branch stable/3.0 to dev/3.0 ???

[Martin Winter]

testing/3.0 or dev/3.0 is both ok to me (I have no preference).


I assume most people think as testing more stable than development
and less stable than stable.

I suggest to make the final decision on this at the next technical
meeting (next tuesday).

- Martin

On 13 Apr 2017, at 16:07, JR Rivers wrote:

> One option is to have a branch (or set of branches) called "testing" which
> is heading towards the next stable.  Once that branch has been declared
> fit, then branch it into stable/X.Y.Z.  That way any "stable" branch was
> good.  At that point, testing can either be destroyed or repurposed.
>
>
>
> On Thu, Apr 13, 2017 at 4:01 PM, Donald Sharp <sharpd at cumulusnetworks.com>
> wrote:
>
>> I see Martin's point.  Does anyone else have a suggestion/thought?
>>
>> donald
>>
>> On Thu, Apr 13, 2017 at 7:28 AM, Lou Berger <lberger at labn.net> wrote:
>>> Fair enough.
>>>
>>> Lou
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On April 13, 2017 7:18:57 AM "Martin Winter" <
>> mwinter at opensourcerouting.org>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 12 Apr 2017, at 18:55, Lou Berger wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Alternatively create a release/2.0 ...
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> This would still give the impression that stable/3.0 is a stable
>>>> version…
>>>>
>>>> I rather don’t have stable (or release) in a name until we have
>>>> something
>>>> stable.
>>>>
>>>> - Martin
>>>>
>>>>> On April 12, 2017 9:13:02 PM "Martin Winter"
>>>>> <mwinter at opensourcerouting.org> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Curious on an opinion here…
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Our branches on the github seem to be confusing to newcomers. Most
>>>>>> people seem
>>>>>> to assume stable/3.0 branch (or master) is the one they should be
>>>>>> building from
>>>>>> for a stable version.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I don’t see much we can do about the master (except maybe update
>>>>>> the
>>>>>> description
>>>>>> to make it clear that this is the most cutting edge version).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> But I would propose we rename stable/3.0 to dev/3.0 until we get to a
>>>>>> more
>>>>>> “stable” version of it.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I’m also thinking about having some auto-merge of commits from the
>>>>>> 3.0
>>>>>> branch
>>>>>> into master for the time being (at least for the non-conflicting
>>>>>> commits) to
>>>>>> keep master up to date.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thoughts?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> - Martin
>>>>>>
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> dev mailing list
>>>>>> dev at lists.frrouting.org
>>>>>> https://lists.frrouting.org/listinfo/dev
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> dev mailing list
>>> dev at lists.frrouting.org
>>> https://lists.frrouting.org/listinfo/dev
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> dev mailing list
>> dev at lists.frrouting.org
>> https://lists.frrouting.org/listinfo/dev
>>


> _______________________________________________
> dev mailing list
> dev at lists.frrouting.org
> https://lists.frrouting.org/listinfo/dev
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.frrouting.org/pipermail/dev/attachments/20170413/a2ef32e1/attachment-0001.html>