docs(dev): Add backport considerations to development process #12484
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Signed-off-by: Josh <josh.t.richards@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Josh <josh.t.richards@gmail.com>
joshtrichards
requested review from
AndyScherzinger,
ChristophWurst,
kesselb,
tobiasKaminsky and
provokateurin
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
☑️ Resolves
This is an attempt to describe a few of the considerations about "when a backport should be done".
To my knowledge there is no formal policy about backports other than "critical bug fixes". The only true "no-brainer" backports are security matters.
This is partially about documenting things as they are today, but it's unavoidably also a policy question. (It's also probable I've slipped a few of my own biases into this).
Related: nextcloud/backportbot#385
🖼️ Screenshots