accumulo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Christopher <>
Subject Re: [git] Documentation and Plan of Action
Date Wed, 12 Jun 2013 21:35:45 GMT
I just asked this question and received a response in the #infra chat
room on freenode:

(05:32:08 PM) ctubbsii: Hi, infra. The Accumulo project is discussing
switching to git, and had a question. Does git allow deleting remote
branches? (which we'd want to do in our workflow, after merging to our
master branch). What other permissions/restrictions are set on Apache
git repos that we should be aware of?
(05:32:46 PM) KurtStam left the room (quit: Quit: KurtStam).
(05:33:22 PM) ke4qqq: ctubbsii yes
(05:33:59 PM) ke4qqq: ctubbsii: can't rewrite history, (e.g. no force
merges) aside from that not much that I can think of off the top of my
(05:34:19 PM) ctubbsii: ke4qqq: thank you very much!
(05:34:59 PM) ke4qqq: np

Christopher L Tubbs II

On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 4:21 PM, Christopher <> wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 10:44 PM, Josh Elser <> wrote:
>> Alright, I think I covered all of the content that's needed.
>> Disclaimer, I actually got Christopher to say "it's kind of long...". Yes,
>> this was intended. I'd rather be (painfully) explicit front and lift out a
>> TL;DR version from the master document.
> I did read the whole thing. I would like to see a place for the
> scenarios I contributed, but other than that, I think it's a
> sufficient plan for transition.
>> _Please_ give feedback now as to what is still unclear about after reading
>> the document. I'd hate to have wasted all of this time writing this to just
>> change our minds again in the near future
> One thing mentioned is the release instructions (how to create/stage a
> release). I'm not sure things will work exactly the same as for svn,
> but I hope they'll be very close (it might require an extra 'git push'
> or something, after the normal steps expressed in assemble/
> I'd have to do some more experimenting with git and the
> maven-release-plugin, after which I could write something up. I can do
> this after the transition, though, and after I'm sure myself how to do
> it smoothly. I don't think this should be a blocker, though.
>> Also, please look for text in _emphasis_ as these are things which I do not
>> believe were decided upon as a group. Copied here for your ease:
>> 1. Need to ensure that deleting remote branches is not an issue. History is
>> still intact so this should not grind against ASF policy.
> IMO, this is probably the most important thing remaining to find out,
> since the described workflow that seems to have consensus assumes
> this.
>> 2. Do we have a nice write-up of the release policies?
>> And, the last thing:
>> Is everyone ok with the default branch when cloning the repository being
>> latest unstable branch (synonymous with what "trunk" is now)? If so, is
>> everyone ok with naming it `master`? This is what my vote is towards.
> +1, +1
>> Once we get these questions answered and the process reviewed, I believe
>> we're ready to move forward with the INFRA ticket.
> +1
> --
> Christopher L Tubbs II

View raw message