https://pantsbuild.org/ logo
Powered by
#general
  • m

    mammoth-pharmacist-54215

    04/29/2016, 9:17 PM
    should land in master first
  • f

    fancy-queen-20734

    04/29/2016, 9:17 PM
    that was what I was thinking too. Trunk first.
  • m

    mammoth-pharmacist-54215

    04/29/2016, 9:17 PM
    cherry pick it to 1.0.x and then we can do a release 1.0.1 with the change.
  • m

    mammoth-pharmacist-54215

    04/29/2016, 9:17 PM
    yeah
  • f

    fancy-queen-20734

    04/29/2016, 9:18 PM
    it seems like we’ve piled up a few changes on master that could / should be cherry-picked
  • f

    fancy-queen-20734

    04/29/2016, 9:18 PM
    now that we’ve got a release
  • m

    mammoth-pharmacist-54215

    04/29/2016, 9:18 PM
    simple smile
  • m

    mammoth-pharmacist-54215

    04/29/2016, 9:19 PM
    welcome Kelly
  • c

    curved-vr-99634

    04/29/2016, 9:19 PM
    thanks!
  • c

    curved-vr-99634

    04/29/2016, 9:19 PM
    i'm at medium and i come with a question, but i have a meeting in 10 minutes so maybe i should wait simple smile
  • c

    curved-vr-99634

    04/29/2016, 9:19 PM
    (just got the reminder hah) - see you all in a bit simple smile
  • w

    witty-crayon-22786

    04/29/2016, 9:28 PM
    @fancy-queen-20734: i think the criteria for going to the 1.0.x branch should be strict, all things considered
  • w

    witty-crayon-22786

    04/29/2016, 9:29 PM
    not too strict, but.
  • f

    fancy-queen-20734

    04/29/2016, 9:51 PM
    I agree, in that any changes to the branch have to conform to our deprecation / feature addition policies
  • w

    witty-crayon-22786

    04/29/2016, 9:51 PM
    and have some maximum complexity bound probably?
  • m

    mammoth-pharmacist-54215

    04/29/2016, 9:51 PM
    not just that, they should generally be fixes not features, extensions, etc.
  • w

    witty-crayon-22786

    04/29/2016, 9:52 PM
    right
  • f

    fancy-queen-20734

    04/29/2016, 9:52 PM
    so, 1.1.x will fork off of master?
  • f

    fancy-queen-20734

    04/29/2016, 9:53 PM
    is that the idea
  • w

    witty-crayon-22786

    04/29/2016, 9:55 PM
    yes
  • m

    mammoth-pharmacist-54215

    04/29/2016, 10:09 PM
    I think @enough-analyst-54434 actually wanted to rename master to 1.1.x-beta or something to that effect.
  • f

    fancy-queen-20734

    04/29/2016, 10:09 PM
    Perhaps we should put the targeted branches in the rb summary?
  • m

    mammoth-pharmacist-54215

    04/29/2016, 10:09 PM
    probably a good idea
  • l

    limited-country-20626

    04/29/2016, 10:09 PM
    i think john voted against the rename, actually
  • l

    limited-country-20626

    04/29/2016, 10:10 PM
    maybe not though - I was in and out of the convo
  • l

    limited-country-20626

    04/29/2016, 10:10 PM
    I would like to keep master, in any case simple smile
  • w

    witty-crayon-22786

    04/29/2016, 10:13 PM
    yea, i was voting for renaming master.
  • m

    mammoth-pharmacist-54215

    04/29/2016, 10:14 PM
    ah, I am probably confused then… been a crazy week.
  • m

    mammoth-pharmacist-54215

    04/29/2016, 10:18 PM
    haha, just did a refresh on a page in pantsbuild.github.io and bam all of a sudden it looked nicer. Thanks @happy-kitchen-89482
  • f

    fancy-queen-20734

    04/29/2016, 10:19 PM
    Should patches against multiple branches require multiple PRs and CI runs, or for things like https://rbcommons.com/s/twitter/r/3786/ is optimistically cherry-picking a bad idea?
1...122412251226...2420Latest