Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:52656 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 74605 invoked from network); 1 Jun 2011 11:45:35 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 1 Jun 2011 11:45:35 -0000 Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com header.from=ilia@prohost.org; sender-id=pass Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com smtp.mail=ilia@prohost.org; spf=pass; sender-id=pass Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain prohost.org designates 209.85.214.42 as permitted sender) X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: ilia@prohost.org X-Host-Fingerprint: 209.85.214.42 mail-bw0-f42.google.com Received: from [209.85.214.42] ([209.85.214.42:45669] helo=mail-bw0-f42.google.com) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP id 0F/42-61684-D5626ED4 for ; Wed, 01 Jun 2011 07:45:34 -0400 Received: by bwz18 with SMTP id 18so4982147bwz.29 for ; Wed, 01 Jun 2011 04:45:29 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.204.46.161 with SMTP id j33mr6531375bkf.212.1306928729746; Wed, 01 Jun 2011 04:45:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.204.72.3 with HTTP; Wed, 1 Jun 2011 04:45:29 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: Date: Wed, 1 Jun 2011 13:45:29 +0200 Message-ID: To: Derick Rethans Cc: PHP internals Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Final version, RFC release process From: ilia@prohost.org (Ilia Alshanetsky) > This variant is not workable, because there are (in the example) in 2014 > *five* branches. Merging between those, manually and automatically is > going to be a major pain. I'd say we all rather want to focus our time > on fixes and new features; and not spend more time doing branch merging, > whatever tool we use for this. This is similar to my initial point about the proposal. We need to figure out a way to have fewer active bug-fix branches, just because it make dev live very difficult. Derick I am not sure your example is much better, since you still have 4 active branches (if I am reading the diagram correctly). I think 3 active bug fix branches, with maybe 1 security fixes only branches is the most we should have.