dolfin team mailing list archive

[Anders Logg <logg@xxxxxxxxx>]

On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 07:50:38AM +0000, Garth N. Wells wrote:
>
>
> On 15 Nov 2011, at 23:44, Anders Logg <logg@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > On Tue, Nov 15, 2011 at 11:33:43PM +0000, Garth N. Wells wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> On 15 Nov 2011, at 23:24, Anders Logg <logg@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >>
> >>> When a bug is retargeted from 1.0.x to something else, should we then
> >>> target it to "trunk" instead of the 1.1 series?
> >>>
> >>
> >> I think that targeting a series should be preferred. It provides structure to feature planning and bug fixes.
> >
> > "trunk" can also be selected as a series.
> >
> > I think of 1.1 as some unknown event in the future, so to me it
> > just means "not now" which is why I think trunk is more appropriate.
> >
>
> Your arguments are the same as we should just wipe the 1.1 series and branch it off in the future when we feel like it.

Yes. I think it only makes sense to create a series when we can
seriously start thinking about it.

Maybe this can work:

* Create series when we start planning for a new *branch*
* Decide which blueprints and bugs should be targeted to the series
* When all blueprints are done and only bugfixes remain, create the branch

> > Maybe we could target to 1.1 if we think it should be fixed soon (but
> > not now) and trunk if we believe it may not happen even in 1.1?
> >
>
> It's about blueprints an bugs. It's reasonable that the majority of bugs that do not cause breakages will target the upcoming release branch. Show stoppers should target the current release branch.
>
> Longer term bugs can target 1.2, 1.3, .  . . or trunk.  It's a judgement, but structure is important and what we've lacked in our approach.
>
>
> >>> We currently don't know when it's time to open the 1.1 series,
> >>
> >> When the bugs and features targeted for 1.1 are largely dealt with.
> >
> > Sounds reasonable, but my feeling is we have no idea what will go into
> > 1.1 now so many things will be targeted to 1.1 and then moved to 1.2.
>
> Which is all just part of release planning.

Yes.

--
Anders