Re: [papyrus-rt-dev] Branch for post 0.8 commits

[Ernesto Posse <eposse@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Ok, and are there any objections to call a branch committers/<committer-id> without a /<topic>?

Also, commits on such branches will not trigger any Hudson job will they?

On Wed, Oct 19, 2016 at 11:28 AM Christian Damus <give.a.damus@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Hi, Ernesto,

There’s nothing preventing Young-Soo or any other committer (or non-committer, using Gerrit) from contributing to a branch named committers/eposse/<whatever>.  But I don’t feel very strongly about the names of committer topic branches.  It’s just that the committer ID does have meaning to the git server, so you might be limited in what you could do with committers/zeligsoft.

I would like to keep the streams/* restricted to only actual release streams, though.

cW

On 19 October, 2016 at 11:23:05, Ernesto Posse (eposse@xxxxxxxxxxxxx) wrote:

Hi Christian.

I do agree that committers/zeligsoft looks odd, but the issue is that we would like to merge our work (Young-Soo's and mine), rather than have individual branches waiting for a while. Furthermore, it's more than just one bug, and we don't want to pollute the repo by creating several branches. That's why I proposed those alternatives. Basically the idea is to try to consolidate work done during the pre-0.8 release "freeze" period, where we shouldn't merge any non 0.8 commits onto master. And how about the other alternative: streams/0.9-prerelease? 

Thanks

On Wed, Oct 19, 2016 at 11:14 AM Christian Damus <give.a.damus@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Hi, Ernesto,

You are correct that streams/0.9-maintenance would be for development of 0.9.x service releases after 0.9.

If it’s just a small-ish bug that you’re working on, I’d recommend the Papyrus convention of bugs/<number>, which I think many Eclipse projects use.  Otherwise, if it’s a topic branch, the best is committers/<name>/<topic>.  That’s also a Papyrus convention and in general use in other Eclipse projects.

Zeligsoft isn’t a committer, so that would look a bit odd.  I seem to recall that the Eclipse Git server has permission rules that recognize the “committers/<committer-id>” pattern and let the matching committer do whatever (s)he likes in there, including non-fast-forward pushes and other destructive actions.

We try to use only these three branching naming patterns in the Papyrus project; there are historical deviations from before we agreed on these.

HTH,

Christian

On 19 October, 2016 at 11:08:42, Ernesto Posse (eposse@xxxxxxxxxxxxx) wrote:

Hello everyone.

Young-Soo and I are already working on some port-0.8 bugs and Simon wants to have a branch for this. So we want to create a branch but we are not sure what to call it. Checking the Papyrus conventions, it looks like branch naming follows one of these forms:

bugs/<number>

committers/<name>/<topic>

streams/<major.minor>-maintenance

Are there any other forms?

So I was wondering if we should create

streams/0.9-maintenance

although the name sounds misleading. My understanding is that the 'maintenance' branches are for commits after the release. Is that right?

How about something like

streams/0.9-prerelease

or something like that? The idea is that the "prerelease" branch would be rebased onto master once 0.8 is released. 

And if there are objections to that, maybe we do one just for us (Zeligsoft), perhaps 

committers/zeligsoft/0.9

?

Thoughts?

--

Ernesto Posse

Zeligsoft

_______________________________________________
papyrus-rt-dev mailing list
papyrus-rt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from this list, visit
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/papyrus-rt-dev

_______________________________________________
papyrus-rt-dev mailing list
papyrus-rt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from this list, visit
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/papyrus-rt-dev