My own speculation about the necessity of the release branch is that its existence "freezes" a particular moment on dev that we all understand to be good and stable. Then, we hold it in release, double check it there over this two-week period, and also keep working as we do as usual on the dev branch...is that the idea? Elisa Typeset by hand on my iPad
On Mar 17, 2016, at 10:14 AM, Elisa
wrote: I think this was the very question Syd was raising earlier: Why do we bother with a temporary release branch , and why don't we simply merge changes directly into master from dev? Is there a special tie-in to Mr. Jenkins that necessitates the special, ephemeral "release" branch?
Elisa
Typeset by hand on my iPad
On Mar 17, 2016, at 9:17 AM, Hugh Cayless
wrote: Shouldn't each release be a fresh branch off of dev though? If the release branch sticks around, don't we risk it diverging? That said, we could always name them "release" and nuke that branch when we're done with it. The Jenkins jobs will just not run if there isn't a branch with the right name, right?
On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 9:06 AM, Peter Stadler
wrote: Is there any benefit in naming the release branches (both Guidelines and Stylesheets) „release-x.x.x“ rather than just „release“? If it was just „release“ we could have proper jenkins jobs for these branches [1] and wouldn’t need to update the config files for every release. (I guess we will be deleting those „release-x.x.x“ branches after the release but a „release“ branch could simply persist.)
What do you think? Peter
[1] along with documentation/archival at https://github.com/TEIC/TEI/tree/dev/Documents/Editing/Jenkins/jobs
-- tei-council mailing list tei-council@lists.tei-c.org http://lists.lists.tei-c.org/mailman/listinfo/tei-council
PLEASE NOTE: postings to this list are publicly archived -- tei-council mailing list tei-council@lists.tei-c.org http://lists.lists.tei-c.org/mailman/listinfo/tei-council
PLEASE NOTE: postings to this list are publicly archived