branch naming conventions [was Re: Guix Day: Notes from the CI session]

[Efraim Flashner <efraim@flashner.co.il>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1488 bytes --]

On Tue, Feb 09, 2021 at 04:46:36PM -0500, Leo Famulari wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 08, 2021 at 06:07:25PM +0100, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
> > ## Open issue: branching strategy
> > 
> >   - currently: building all of `master` + the "core" of `core-updates`
> >   - schedule
> >     - currently ad-hoc: volunteers get to choose when to freeze/merge
> >   - actions
> >     - pushes to `core-updates` should cancel all pending builds on that branch (see Guix Build Coordinator)
> >     - have a dashboard showing active branches, statuses (wild-west, frozen), and merge deadlines
> >       - could be implemented in Cuirass
> >       - specs could have extra properties (such as "merge deadline") that Cuirass would display
> >       - or it could use status info from the Data Service, as in https://data.guix-patches.cbaines.net/
> >     - naming convention: `core-updates-frozen` vs `core-updates`, etc.
> 
> So, does anyone want to change the naming conventions?
> 
> I like the idea of, in normal times, only pushing to "core-updates-next"
> and "staging-next", and then freezing and building "core-updates" and
> "staging".

My concern about that is that it basically swaps what we have now. Using
-frozen makes it a bit clearer that we're building it out.

-- 
Efraim Flashner   <efraim@flashner.co.il>   אפרים פלשנר
GPG key = A28B F40C 3E55 1372 662D  14F7 41AA E7DC CA3D 8351
Confidentiality cannot be guaranteed on emails sent or received unencrypted

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]