<div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_extra"><br class="">On Mon, Mar 31, 2014 at 11:40 AM, Vaclav Petras <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:wenzeslaus@gmail.com" target="_blank">wenzeslaus@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div class=""><div class=""><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex"><br>I find that 6 months is a fairly long period to maintain a bugfix-only branch. I would rather propose to either branch later, or to allow more than just bugfixes into the release branch for 4-5 months before going into bugfix-only phase for the last month or two. During the first period new features can be ported to the release branch once they have had some testing in trunk.<font color="#888888"><br>
<br></font></blockquote><div><br></div></div></div><div>Moritz, I believe that these are two different things.</div><div><br></div><div>...</div><div><br></div><div>Second, committing features to both branches is what is taking the time from us and creating uncertainty about what is where and what are the branches for. I think that this is crucial point and the lengths of time periods above should be decided based on this, not the other way around.</div>
<div><br></div></blockquote><div class="gmail_quote"><div class="gmail_quote">On Mon, Mar 31, 2014 at 11:09 PM, Yann Chemin <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:ychemin@gmail.com" target="_blank">ychemin@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex">It looks like we all want to see version numbers move on a yearly basis with periods of branching and periods of releasing...</blockquote>
</div></div><br>We need to agree on the policy of committing to release branch(es). See my proposal [1] for details.<br><br>[1] <a href="http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/grass-psc/2014-March/001150.html">http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/grass-psc/2014-March/001150.html</a></div>
</div>