Re: Changes to the branching workflow

[Christopher Lemmer Webber]

Hello,

As someone who jumps in and out of Guix development occasionally but who
does have commit access (probably for grantparented-in reasons, heh),
sometimes I don't know where I should commit code or what the current
branching policy is, and I might miss emails like this.

I wonder if we should formalize it.  What about adding a section to the 
"Contributing" section of the manual explaining what the different
branches are, and when you have a patch that's been approved, when to
push it to which branch?

I think that would help me, and maybe it would help others.  Thoughts?

 - Chris

Leo Famulari writes:

> Based on experiences with the last "staging" cycle and discussions at
> the most recent Guix Day meeting [0], we've changed the branching
> workflow.
>
> The default branch names remain "core-updates" and "staging".
>
> When we begin actively building and testing the branches, they will be
> renamed to "core-updates-frozen" and "staging-frozen", respectively.
>
> This will indicate that they are closed to any changes except for bug
> fixes and merges of the master branch.
>
> During those periods, new patches can be pushed to "core-updates-next"
> and "staging-next".
>
> Hopefully these changes will clarify the status of the branches and
> reduce confusion.
>
> [0] https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guix-devel/2021-02/msg00163.html