Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:59570 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 16561 invoked from network); 9 Apr 2012 22:13:24 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 9 Apr 2012 22:13:24 -0000 Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com smtp.mail=smalyshev@sugarcrm.com; spf=pass; sender-id=pass Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com header.from=smalyshev@sugarcrm.com; sender-id=pass Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain sugarcrm.com designates 67.192.241.153 as permitted sender) X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: smalyshev@sugarcrm.com X-Host-Fingerprint: 67.192.241.153 smtp153.dfw.emailsrvr.com Linux 2.6 Received: from [67.192.241.153] ([67.192.241.153:50954] helo=smtp153.dfw.emailsrvr.com) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP id FE/F1-34074-20F538F4 for ; Mon, 09 Apr 2012 18:13:23 -0400 Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by smtp15.relay.dfw1a.emailsrvr.com (SMTP Server) with ESMTP id 66606300436; Mon, 9 Apr 2012 18:13:20 -0400 (EDT) X-Virus-Scanned: OK Received: by smtp15.relay.dfw1a.emailsrvr.com (Authenticated sender: smalyshev-AT-sugarcrm.com) with ESMTPSA id 2D6EE3003FE; Mon, 9 Apr 2012 18:13:20 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <4F835EFF.6020905@sugarcrm.com> Date: Mon, 09 Apr 2012 15:13:19 -0700 Organization: SugarCRM User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.6; rv:11.0) Gecko/20120313 Thunderbird/11.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Kris Craig CC: PHP Internals References: <4F82878A.6030609@sugarcrm.com> <4F834F94.1000002@sugarcrm.com> <4F835B34.5020909@sugarcrm.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] release process with git From: smalyshev@sugarcrm.com (Stas Malyshev) Hi! > My concern is that merge conflicts can occur when cherry-picking in this > manner. It's just generally not a "best practices" approach when using Which merge conflicts? Diff between 5.4 and 5.4.X will never be big enough to have any conflicts. It's just 2 weeks of stable version code. > cherry-picking. These fixes can then be merged back into trunk, so the > end result is the same but with far less manual work and less potential > for human error. I'm OK with some manual work, we won't have that much (only for critical bugs). I don't want to merge release branch into dev branch since it contains release-only stuff that doesn't have to be in dev branch, and I want merges to be one direction only - from dev to release, I don't want people putting code into release branch after RC1 unless it is an emergency. Otherwise we get much slower release cycles since each change basically sets us back 2 weeks. -- Stanislav Malyshev, Software Architect SugarCRM: http://www.sugarcrm.com/ (408)454-6900 ext. 227