celix-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Alexander Broekhuis <a.broekh...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Use master as development branch
Date Wed, 06 May 2020 18:44:52 GMT
And for the record, that approved is also a +1!

Op wo 6 mei 2020 om 20:44 schreef Alexander Broekhuis <a.broekhuis@gmail.com
>:

> Approved! There are some failed checks, not sure if that is relevant for
> merging..
>
> Also, why not use a branch on the repo, but a fork? Coupling apache and
> github account can easily be done via [1]
>
> [1]: https://gitbox.apache.org/
>
> Op wo 6 mei 2020 om 20:40 schreef Roy Lenferink <rlenferink@apache.org>:
>
>>
>>
>> On 2020/05/06 06:17:05, Alexander Broekhuis <a.broekhuis@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> > Hi Roy,
>> >
>> > Totally missed your earlier email, my apologies!
>> >
>>
>> No problem!
>>
>> > Regarding the diagram, I'm missing a few things:
>> >
>> > * Currently the tag is done on master, but I think it makes sense to do
>> > this on the release branch itself.
>> >   With the current model, regular (non-release) dev cannot do anything
>> on
>> > master until the release is done. I don't think that is the right way.
>> > * Some feature branch/commit/merge action on master while a release
>> branch
>> > is active makes sense IMO.
>> >
>> > This is similar to what you already did for the hotfix branches, tag on
>> the
>> > branch itself, not on master.
>> >
>> > I've updated the diagram, please take a look if that makes sense.
>>
>> Both changes look good and make sense to me.
>>
>> >
>> > Moving this diagram tot he site is a next step I guess?
>>
>> Indeed. I have just opened the following pull request to the celix-site
>> repo [1]. Feel free to review/
>> approve. If it looks good I'll update our main repo to use the master
>> branch as default branch.
>>
>> [1] https://github.com/apache/celix-site/pull/9
>>
>> >
>> > Op zo 3 mei 2020 om 15:17 schreef Roy Lenferink <rlenferink@apache.org
>> >:
>> >
>> > > Alexander,
>> > >
>> > > Were you able to have a look at the proposed workflow I visualized on
>> the
>> > > wiki page [1][2]? If so, what
>> > > did you think of it and does this change your -1 to a +1 ?
>> > >
>> > > If not, what else is missing before we can move this forward?
>> > >
>> > > [1] https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/x/MwwRCQ
>> > > [2]
>> > >
>> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/r179ab76820ca6c156967c2c8af09e197aaa9c221b3d5c76a587c597c%40%3Cdev.celix.apache.org%3E
>> > >
>> > > Roy
>> > >
>> > > On 2020/04/23 04:34:00, Alexander Broekhuis <a.broekhuis@gmail.com>
>> > > wrote:
>> > > > I'm not against this. But would like some more info on how we are
>> going
>> > > to work with this.
>> > > >
>> > > > What is your proposal wrt feature, bugfix and release branches?
>> > > > One concern I have is that last one. With a dev/master split, a
>> release
>> > > branch can be used to prepare a release to master, while dev is used
>> to
>> > > continue merging new features to.
>> > > > How should we do that now?
>> > > >
>> > > > Before doing the actual change, can you draft up a developer page
>> for it?
>> > > >
>> > > > Because of this, for now a -1. Will gladly change to a +1 if things
>> are
>> > > clear!
>> > > >
>> > > > --
>> > > > Met vriendelijke groet,
>> > > >
>> > > > Alexander Broekhuis
>> > > > On 22 apr. 2020 19:22 +0200, Roy Lenferink <rlenferink@apache.org>,
>> > > wrote:
>> > > > > Hi all,
>> > > > >
>> > > > > I'd like to propose the idea of using the 'master' branch as
our
>> > > development branch. Why?
>> > > > > - ASF releases are promoted through the ASF mirroring system.
Our
>> > > website is built on top of this
>> > > > > allowing the user to select a mirror for downloading the release.
>> > > Cloning the git repository is not
>> > > > > the first thing a user does. Even if users plan to use the git
>> > > repository they can use a specific tag.
>> > > > > - The ASF allows committers to use a so-called .asf.yaml file
[1]
>> for
>> > > changing repository settings.
>> > > > > However, changes to this file are only propagated when made on
the
>> > > master (or trunk) branch.
>> > > > >
>> > > > > IMO our current workflow with develop/master just adds extra
>> > > complexity. Other ASF projects are
>> > > > > using the master branch as their development branch as well,
e.g.
>> > > Spark [2], Dubbo [3], Flink [4] &
>> > > > > HBase[5].
>> > > > >
>> > > > > If no objections within 72 hours I'll merge the 'develop' branch
>> to
>> > > our 'master' branch, update the
>> > > > > current open pull requests to have 'master' as base branch, open
a
>> > > ticket to remove branch
>> > > > > protection for the develop branch & update the website to
point
>> to the
>> > > master branch for changes
>> > > > > instead of the develop branch.
>> > > > >
>> > > > > See also [6] for a short discussion on this topic already.
>> > > > >
>> > > > > Best,
>> > > > > Roy
>> > > > >
>> > > > > [1] https://s.apache.org/asfyaml
>> > > > > [2] https://github.com/apache/spark
>> > > > > [3] https://github.com/apache/dubbo
>> > > > > [4] https://github.com/apache/flink
>> > > > > [5] https://github.com/apache/hbase
>> > > > > [6]
>> https://github.com/apache/celix/pull/202#issuecomment-616429007
>> > > >
>> > >
>> >
>> >
>> > --
>> > Met vriendelijke groet,
>> >
>> > Alexander Broekhuis
>> >
>>
>
>
> --
> Met vriendelijke groet,
>
> Alexander Broekhuis
>


-- 
Met vriendelijke groet,

Alexander Broekhuis

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message