[haiku-development] Re: Haiku R1A4 Postmortem
- From: luroh <lurohh@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: haiku-development@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2012 21:36:32 +0100
Ingo Weinhold wrote:
> On 12/09/2012 07:25 PM, Landon Fuller wrote:
>>
>> FreeBSD has a very solid process for handling release engineering, with
>> the additional benefit of it being well documented; I think it could be
>> worth cribbing from their experience:
>> http://www5.us.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/articles/releng/index.html
>
>
> Sounds reasonable. And it isn't that different from our process either.
I'm sorry, but I got slightly upset by reading your statement. If
anything, surely you must admit that the FreeBSD process better
resembles my suggestion in this very thread than our current release
process? Let's see:
* RM laying down the law - check.
* Developers committing to branch - check.
* Joint code review - check.
It is nothing at all like our current process.
> A
> main difference is that they have a permanent stable branch, which we don't
> (we might consider that, maybe when starting with the beta phase). Aside
> from that, instead of having the RM do the merging themselves, they only
> have to approve of merge requests and have the developers do the actual job.
Not during their initial 15-day merge window.
- luroh
Other related posts:
