[dmd-beta] beta branch name

[Andrew Edwards]

On 1/23/14, 2:01 PM, Walter Bright wrote:
> I agree, I don't know what's wrong with what we had before:
>
> 1. All pull requests get merged to master
> 2. Create 2.065 branch
> 3. Cherry-pick from master to 2.065 as required
> 4. Tag 2.065.whatever as releases get done on that branch
>
> Easy, simple. All these other procedures seem like massive 
> over-engineering to me.
Good to go... I for one did not see either of you weigh in on the 
proposal when Brad Roberts made it 
(http://forum.dlang.org/post/CAFU1Uzpm4DBADOxMjcJ_Guj1=T8BQ4nPb5OEbADNbUQDD2ijuQ@mail.gmail.com). 
I decided to use it because, compared to the alternative of trying to 
convince volunteers to do something they do not want to, it would be 
much simpler for me to follow this scheme.

To me there is no difference between the two processes, except the 
"we've always done it this way syndrome". Fixes are generated from 
release tags into a hotfix branch. Once the fix is released, we merge it 
back into master, remove the branch and move on. I am preparing both 
releases and hotpicks so I don't see any extra work being generated for 
the devs.

The only chance I see on your parts is the need to change the tester 
scripts to point search for and test "hotfix" and "release" branches if 
they exist. I'm not the person doing that so I might have an overly 
simplified view of your processes but I really don't see the big deal.

Regards,
Andrew