On Fri, Mar 23, 2012 at 7:33 AM, Chad innocentkiller@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Mar 22, 2012 at 3:57 PM, Brion Vibber bvibber@wikimedia.org wrote:
I kinda like the first model (it feels more organic), but the second has the advantage that you've got a previous branch to revert to quickly if needed. That's a plus for deployment work.
-- brion
I kinda like the idea of both. We need a wmf-branch (specific hacks for us, ability to trail master when need be), but having tags is super useful too.
Well, we need two wmf-branches when we're mid-deploy, which is going to be far more frequently in the new regime. When mediawiki.org, meta, commons, and nlwiki are on 1.20wmf03 for a week, while enwiki and others are on 1.20wmf02, we'll need to be mindful of what we might backport to both branches.
Now, in this new model, backporting in general should be far, far less frequent, and only done for the most urgent bugfixes.
Why not just have the branch but make a new tag before any scap? Best of both worlds ;-)
There are almost certainly going to be times when the wmf branch isn't linear (e.g. a security fix needs to be deployed to all wikis, even though we're not ready to push all wikis to the tip of the wmf branch)
Rob