cloudstack-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Marcus <shadow...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [Merge] CloudStack IAM branch to master
Date Sat, 15 Mar 2014 13:45:24 GMT
I should mention that by default the squashed commit wraps the whole
history up into the commit message. Also, my original comment was more of a
question, as I know this topic has already been thoroughly discussed but I
didn't remember what we were supposed to be doing.
On Mar 15, 2014 7:41 AM, "Marcus" <shadowsor@gmail.com> wrote:

> Yeah, I've been down that road before and its not always fun.
> On Mar 15, 2014 4:49 AM, "Rajani Karuturi" <Rajani.Karuturi@citrix.com>
> wrote:
>
>> I think preserving the history is important. Especially for the developer
>> to understand the history if it and why he did it this way.
>>
>> branch merges can also be easily reverted if required.
>> http://git-scm.com/blog/2010/03/02/undoing-merges.html
>>
>> https://www.kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/howto/revert-a-faulty-merge.txt
>>
>>
>> ~Rajani
>>
>>
>>
>> On 14-Mar-2014, at 11:50 pm, Chiradeep Vittal <
>> Chiradeep.Vittal@citrix.com<mailto:Chiradeep.Vittal@citrix.com>> wrote:
>>
>> For a new feature, I'd agree that squashed-merge is better.
>>
>> From: Marcus <shadowsor@gmail.com<mailto:shadowsor@gmail.com><mailto:
>> shadowsor@gmail.com>>
>> Reply-To: "dev@cloudstack.apache.org<mailto:dev@cloudstack.apache.org
>> ><mailto:dev@cloudstack.apache.org>" <dev@cloudstack.apache.org<mailto:
>> dev@cloudstack.apache.org><mailto:dev@cloudstack.apache.org>>
>> Date: Friday, March 14, 2014 at 10:05 AM
>> To: "dev@cloudstack.apache.org<mailto:dev@cloudstack.apache.org><mailto:
>> dev@cloudstack.apache.org>" <dev@cloudstack.apache.org<mailto:
>> dev@cloudstack.apache.org><mailto:dev@cloudstack.apache.org>>
>> Subject: Re: [Merge] CloudStack IAM branch to master
>>
>> Maybe, although to some extent the action of merging I think should be
>> seen as saying "this is complete". If the history is important, it
>> could perhaps be kept around in the feature branch until it becomes
>> irrelevant. Of course it may have minor issues that aren't known, but
>> I think the ability to preserve master and easily be able to roll back
>> an entire feature is attractive.
>>
>> On Fri, Mar 14, 2014 at 12:01 PM, Prachi Damle <Prachi.Damle@citrix.com
>> <mailto:Prachi.Damle@citrix.com><mailto:Prachi.Damle@citrix.com>>
wrote:
>> Just a thought about the squashed merge, if there are multiple developers
>> working on a feature branch as in this case, won't it be better to preserve
>> the change history?
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Min Chen [mailto:min.chen@citrix.com]
>> Sent: Friday, March 14, 2014 9:35 AM
>> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org<mailto:dev@cloudstack.apache.org><mailto:
>> dev@cloudstack.apache.org>
>> Subject: Re: [Merge] CloudStack IAM branch to master
>>
>> Thanks Marcus. I am not aware of this convention, will remember that next
>> time when I do the merge.
>>
>> -min
>>
>> On 3/13/14 10:30 PM, "Marcus" <shadowsor@gmail.com<mailto:
>> shadowsor@gmail.com><mailto:shadowsor@gmail.com>> wrote:
>>
>> Min, in looking at this branch merge, I need to be reminded whether we
>> are supposed to squash feature branches when they come in, or preserve
>> history. It's nice to preserve history, but it's a lot easier to undo a
>> squashed merge.
>>
>> On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 5:56 PM, Min Chen <min.chen@citrix.com<mailto:
>> min.chen@citrix.com><mailto:min.chen@citrix.com>> wrote:
>> IAM branch is now merged to master.
>>
>> Thanks
>> -min
>>
>> On 3/13/14 10:13 AM, "Min Chen" <min.chen@citrix.com<mailto:
>> min.chen@citrix.com><mailto:min.chen@citrix.com>> wrote:
>>
>> Since we haven't heard of any objections to this merge for 3 days, I
>> am going to merge it to master today.
>>
>> Thanks
>> -min
>>
>> On 3/11/14 12:23 PM, "Hugo Trippaers" <hugo@trippaers.nl<mailto:
>> hugo@trippaers.nl><mailto:hugo@trippaers.nl>> wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 11 mrt. 2014, at 19:52, Min Chen <min.chen@citrix.com<mailto:
>> min.chen@citrix.com><mailto:min.chen@citrix.com>> wrote:
>>
>> Also, have already run FingBugs on our branch and addressed all
>> new findings introduced by our branch.
>>
>> Awesome! :-)
>>
>>
>> Thanks.
>> -min
>>
>> On 3/10/14 7:33 PM, "Min Chen" <min.chen@citrix.com<mailto:
>> min.chen@citrix.com><mailto:min.chen@citrix.com>> wrote:
>>
>> No new jar dependencies.
>>
>> -min
>>
>> Sent from my iPhone
>>
>> On Mar 10, 2014, at 7:22 PM, "Chiradeep Vittal"
>> <Chiradeep.Vittal@citrix.com<mailto:Chiradeep.Vittal@citrix.com><mailto:
>> Chiradeep.Vittal@citrix.com>> wrote:
>>
>> Any new jar dependencies?
>>
>> On 3/10/14, 11:34 AM, "Min Chen" <min.chen@citrix.com<mailto:
>> min.chen@citrix.com><mailto:min.chen@citrix.com>> wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> Prachi and I would like to merge CloudStack Identity and Access
>> Management(IAM) plugin services to the master branch.
>> Development for  this effort has been done by Prachi and me on
>> ACS rbac branch
>>
>>
>> (https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=cloudstack.git;a=shor
>> tlo
>> g;
>> h
>> =r
>> ef
>> s/heads/rbac).
>> Checklists for the merge:
>> 1. JIRA ticket:
>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-5920.
>> 2. Functional Specs:
>>
>>
>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/CloudStac
>> k+I
>> de
>> n
>> ti
>> ty
>> +and+Access+Management+%28IAM%29+Plugin. We have proposed this
>> feature
>> back in Jan, and accommodated all the feedbacks in our
>> implementation.
>> 3. Unit tests for the feature are available at:
>> services/iam/server/test
>> (for iam server) and services/iam/plugin/test (for iam plugin).
>> 4. Marvin integration tests for the feature are available at:
>> test/integration/smoke/test_vm_iam.py.
>> 5. Branch has been rebased with master branch up to commit
>> 63e3eea7905e22cab9466b28a2ab2a80b586aeed.
>> 6. RAT test has been passed.
>>
>> Thanks.
>> -min
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>

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