activemq-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Thiago Kronig <thiagokro...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Git workflow for committers
Date Mon, 08 Jun 2015 15:44:33 GMT
Regarding git flow, I think it inserts layers of indirection only useful to
projects with some degree of concurrent development. At the current pace of
Artemis, having a master as a development branch and cooking up
issues/fixes on feature-branches should suffice.

Github flow: always branch from master, propose a PR, after peer review, if
it is minor, merge it to master, if it is not, either bump the version up
and merge it or reserve it for a future release. PRs can be made of
multiple commits if it facilitates our understanding, and should be merged
with --no-ff, to avoid rebase mistakes.

On Mon, Jun 8, 2015 at 10:59 AM Martyn Taylor <mtaylor@redhat.com> wrote:

> Similar to other comments here.
>
> My preference to use Git Hub work flow for all.  A consistent work flow
> across board keeps everyone on the same page.  I also feel that peer
> reviews are important part of the  work flow.  It helps prevent mistakes
> and keeps the code base in good shape.
>
> On 08/06/15 14:41, Daniel Kulp wrote:
> >> On Jun 8, 2015, at 9:35 AM, Justin Bertram <jbertram@apache.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> We recently published a Hacking Guide that outlines the typical
> development cycle:
> https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/blob/master/docs/hacking-guide/en/code.md#typical-development-cycle
> >>
> >> Improvements are certainly welcome.
> > I think this is ok for workflow for non-committers.  Nice to have that
> documented.   Committers should not have to go through github.
> >
> > In particular: step 4 can just be push your branch to a new branch at
> Apache.  There isn’t a need for github for that
> > Step 5:  if you push to Apache in step 4, all the commits would be on
> the Apache commits list and would be fine for discussion from there.
> > Step 7:  if you are a committer, just push it to master.  There is no
> need for the pull requests from github.
> >
> >
> > Dan
> >
> >
> >>
> >> Justin
> >>
> >> P.S. I already sent a PR to get the references to the old JIRA repo
> (i.e. ACTIVEMQ6) updated to the new one (i.e. ARTEMIS).
> >>
> >> ----- Original Message -----
> >> From: "Bruce Snyder" <bruce.snyder@gmail.com>
> >> To: dev@activemq.apache.org
> >> Sent: Sunday, June 7, 2015 2:10:14 PM
> >> Subject: Git workflow for committers
> >>
> >> New committer Marc Schöchlin has raised some questions about the git
> >> workflow to use as he continues to work on the init scripts. This is a
> >> perfect opportunity for all committers to discuss the workflow that we
> >> recommend be used when working on ActiveMQ projects and I will document
> the
> >> end result on the wiki in association with the 'How To Become a
> >> Committer...' page.
> >>
> >> After many years of experience with git, I am a big fan of git flow (
> >> http://nvie.com/posts/a-successful-git-branching-model/) but I don't
> >> believe that is being used on ActiveMQ. So what is the general git
> workflow
> >> that committers use today?
> >>
> >> Bruce
> >>
> >> --
> >> perl -e 'print
> >> unpack("u30","D0G)U8V4\@4VYY9&5R\"F)R=6-E+G-N>61E<D\!G;6%I;\"YC;VT*"
);'
> >>
> >> ActiveMQ in Action: http://bit.ly/2je6cQ
> >> Blog: http://bruceblog.org/
> >> Twitter: http://twitter.com/brucesnyder
>
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message