From: servilio <servilio@gmail.com>
To: David Bremner <david@tethera.net>
Cc: notmuch@notmuchmail.org
Subject: Re: branchs and tags and merges oh my!
Date: Sat, 2 Jul 2011 11:59:04 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAPFwwQhGy6a4Hes2-7r8B2J=eaE_+07p4FGoh5ds=Ws1_+5H5w@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87tyb5mumf.fsf@zancas.localnet>
On 1 July 2011 19:47, David Bremner <david@tethera.net> wrote:
> On Fri, 01 Jul 2011 14:48:24 -0700, Keith Packard <keithp@keithp.com> wrote:
>> > 2) merge master onto the release branch
>>
>> This makes doing 'bug fix' stuff on top of 0.6 a bit more challenging.
>
> Can you elaborate? Naively it seems like one ends up with the same kind
> of spur of history off of the 0.6 tag in both cases.
>
> ----.--------------master
> \
> ---- 0.6 ---- bugfix
>
> versus
>
> -----.----------.
> \ \
> ---- 0.6--------master
> \
> ----- bugfix
>
>> As an alternative, you probably should have simply put non-release
>> patches on a separate 'feature branch' (probably residing in the feature
>> author's repository) which would then be merged onto master post-0.6
>
> Yes, that is certainly nice from a git history point of view. On the
> other hand the point of separating the roles of feature merger from
> release mechanic was to allow Carl more time to work on merging features
> into master, and I'm not sure how turning master over to the release
> manager helps that.
What about having Carl do the merging of features into a develop
branch[1], then the release manager prepares a release in a release
branch, merging back and tagging into master when release is ready? A
similar workflow could be followed for bugfix releases (branch to
bugfix/release branch, prepare, merge back to master, tag).
This workflow would keep a nice useful history while allowing even
more independence between the feature merging and release process,
what do you think?
Servilio
[1] Or next, or whatever other name is better understood by the community.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-07-02 15:59 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-07-01 21:37 branchs and tags and merges oh my! David Bremner
2011-07-01 21:48 ` Keith Packard
2011-07-01 23:47 ` David Bremner
2011-07-02 15:59 ` servilio [this message]
2011-07-02 17:30 ` David Bremner
2011-07-03 7:14 ` servilio
2011-07-03 12:44 ` David Bremner
2011-07-03 14:41 ` servilio
2011-07-02 12:44 ` David Bremner
2011-07-02 15:23 ` Tom Prince
2011-07-02 20:23 ` Jed Brown
2011-07-03 12:32 ` David Bremner
2011-07-03 14:30 ` servilio
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
List information: https://notmuchmail.org/
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to='CAPFwwQhGy6a4Hes2-7r8B2J=eaE_+07p4FGoh5ds=Ws1_+5H5w@mail.gmail.com' \
--to=servilio@gmail.com \
--cc=david@tethera.net \
--cc=notmuch@notmuchmail.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
Code repositories for project(s) associated with this public inbox
https://yhetil.org/notmuch.git/
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).