On Sat, 23 Apr 2016, Jed Brown wrote:

Satish Balay <[email protected]> writes:

...

Ok - the master tests ran overnight

I've switched the day builds to maint. [nightbuilds are reverted to next]

Also created maint-3.6 branch off maint - and updated maint with master.

Uh, then people that have been tracking 'maint' get something backward incompatible before a release has been tagged or announced. I think that's rude. How did this become the release process? I thought we declared a merge deadline for 'master', feature freeze period, then tagged the release on 'master'. That way people tracking 'maint' only get the new release changes after the release has been made.

I'm sure you'll find faults with my answer - but here it goes.. Master currently doesn't work as you describe. To me - currently we are at RC [yeah - witout a change in petscversion.h or a tag] - and RC to RELEASE should be via maint workflow - hence this update to maint. I didn't intend to be rude to our 'maint' users. Ideally there should have been a tracking branch maint-3.6 always - so users who whish to time the switch from 3.6 to 3.7 do this on their terms [and not implicitly via maint]. I'll make an annoucement to maint users about switching to maint-3.6 branch. Satish