bloodhound-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Branko ─îibej <br...@wandisco.com>
Subject Re: svn commit: r1480061 - /bloodhound/trunk/installer/README.rst
Date Tue, 07 May 2013 20:50:15 GMT
On 07.05.2013 22:30, brane@apache.org wrote:
> Author: brane
> Date: Tue May  7 20:30:34 2013
> New Revision: 1480061
>
> URL: http://svn.apache.org/r1480061
> Log:
> * installer/README.rst: Bring the note about using the --system-site-packages
>    option with virtualenv from the 0.5 branch back to trunk.

I happened to notice that the installation instructions on trunk were
out of date with regard to the latest release. That made my hair stand
on end. :)

I suggest that the normal process for updating release branches should
be to make the change on trunk /first/, and then merge it onto the
relevant release branch. If we do it this way, mishaps like this one
cannot happen; and it's even more important to do this for bug fixes
than documentation fixes.

Subversion has long followed this process to good effect. The
back-porting procedure is documented here:

http://subversion.apache.org/docs/community-guide/releasing.html#release-stabilization

and I propose all of that page is useful reading for BH developers.

Notice that on the Subversion project, we maintain a STATUS file on each
release branch which contains a list of proposed back-ports, and all
such proposals need approval from several committers. I'm not suggesting
BH should require such a formal approach for now, but it /would/ be a
good idea to track backports somewhere -- if for no other reason than to
make it easier to maintain release notes.


-- Brane

P.S.: Needless to say, for Subversion, we have a daemon running that
periodically looks at the "approved" section of the STATUS file and
automatically merges the backports for us. :)


-- 
Branko ─îibej
Director of Subversion | WANdisco | www.wandisco.com


Mime
View raw message