| Re: [cf-dev] Branching strategy |
|
Having multiple repositories has required a lot of effort to maintain consistent versioning and build process. I think we could still have clearly
distinguishable discussions around issues and PRs, e.g. by using appropriate tags for the individual modules. Regarding the separate commit logs, I do not really see the big advantage of that. On the other hand, having a single repository (and build) would
make it easier to detect problems/incompatibilities/API breaks changes in one module introduce in other modules. We could still produce multiple artifacts but I think overall management of the code base would be much easier if we only had one code repository.
We could also still have different committers have different “focus” areas in the code base based on the sub-modules (e.g. core, element-connector, scandium etc). However, if we stick with the different repos we should definitely use the same branching strategy for all of them, otherwise I think we will have
a hard time maintaining consistency between them. Kai From: cf-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:cf-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of Kovatsch Matthias Do you mean having everything from element-connector to Actinium in a single repo? I see the point of reducing the maintenance effort. However, it would also convolute the development tracks. I found it actually quite nice that
Scandium has had its own track, with separate DTLS-specific issues, discussions, etc. (also commit logs). Also forking out the Actinium development as we did over the last months was quite convenient (I still have to merge it back into the Eclipse repo). Simon, Kai, how do you feel about this from the Scandium perspective? Ciao Matthias From:
cf-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:cf-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of Julien Vermillard Since all the project are released on the same life-cycle, why not first merging everything in the same git repo? I would make having 3 branches more sustainable. Julien
|