← Back to team overview

kicad-developers team mailing list archive

Re: Branches

 

Unless we are going to prohibit new features (new file formats, new tool
framework for eeschema, etc.) from being merged into the dev branch
until 5.1 is released, I disagree.  If we want to only work on 5.1 in
the dev branch, then I'm OK with this proposal.

On 7/19/2018 8:39 AM, John Beard wrote:
> I agree with Orson. It's unfortunate for people to not be able to dump
> new features onto master after such a long freeze. However, if 5.1 and
> master/6-dev diverge, there will be a lot of pain in porting bugs,
> especially if one branch has work that very is invasive and touches a
> lot of code, and one does not.
> 
> Moreover, testing efforts will be split, with some people only on
> 5.1-dev and some only using master. This can easily allow bugs to slip
> by into one branch or the other.

There should be nothing in the 5.1 branch that is not also in the dev
branch so everything in the 5.1 branch should be tested in the dev
branch builds.

> 
> I think there should only be master, which is the 5.1-dev branch. When
> that splits to become a release, 6.0-dev can start.
> 
> Big features that don't suit 5.1 will just have to wait for the start
> of 6, being maintained in separate branches if necessary, either under
> the KiCad aegis in the main repo, or less formally in any other Git
> repo. A list of ongoing known dev branches somewhere would be helpful
> (eeschema GAL and Cairo printing being two I can think would be useful
> to document).
> 
> Of course, people with new features can always petition the project
> lead for permission to put stuff into 5.1! Otherwise, focussing on 5.1
> issues now will get both 5.1 done and out of the way sooner (important
> to fix Python), and also get us to the state where 6.0-dev can receive
> the full attention from devs, lead and interested users.
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> John
> 
> 
> On Thu, Jul 19, 2018 at 10:25 AM, Maciej Sumiński
> <maciej.suminski@xxxxxxx> wrote:
>> I wonder if there is a point in keeping 5.1 and master branches
>> separated. In 5.1 there is a lot of new code that will need patches, and
>> they need to be applied to both branches now. If we keep adding more
>> features to the master branch, then at one point the branch may diverge
>> significantly enough to make patch porting non trivial.
>>
>> What do you think about replacing the current master branch with 5.1?
>> This way we can focus on the wxGTK3 problem, fix issues that we discover
>> and once 5.1 is out - keep adding new features to 6.0-dev? For the time
>> being new features might be developed in private branches.
>>
>> BTW. I really like 5.1 UI improvements, good job Jeff!
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Orson
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
>> Post to     : kicad-developers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
>> More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
>>
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
> Post to     : kicad-developers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
> More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
> 


Follow ups

References