couchdb-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jan Lehnardt <>
Subject Re: Merging the fauxton branch into master
Date Mon, 18 Mar 2013 21:37:13 GMT

On Mar 18, 2013, at 22:32 , Russell Branca <> wrote:

> On Mon, Mar 18, 2013 at 2:07 PM, Jan Lehnardt <> wrote:
>> On Mar 18, 2013, at 21:06 , Russell Branca <> wrote:
>>> Last week I noticed the fauxton branch and master branch have drifted
>> quite
>>> apart, and are a couple hundred commits different in either direction. I
>>> created a branch 'fauxton-rebase' [1] that is the fauxton rebased on top
>> of
>>> the laster master as of friday.
>> Regular rebasing should make parallel branches manageable, or am I missing
>> something?
> Regular rebasing will keep the branches synchronized, but it will rewrite
> the history underneath peoples' feet. I moved my initial rebase over to the
> fauxton-rebase branch to avoid messing with anyone currently working in the
> fauxton branch. I don't mind having a parallel branch for Fauxton, and I
> can take care of bringing in the latest changes, but if we go that route I
> would prefer to do merges rather than rebases given we have a number of
> people working on the branch now. I know how some people feel about doing
> merges ;-) so I figured the best bet was to just throw everything in master
> and dodge the problem entirely. If anyone else has a better suggestion, I'm
> happy to hear it.

Fair enough :)

>>> If there are no objections I would like to bring the fauxton-rebase
>> branch
>>> into master to simplify development workflow and keeping both branches
>>> updated.
>> No objection per se, just:
>> - Since master is poised to be the 1.4.x release branch and before long
>> the
>>   1.4.0 release, is Fauxton in good shape to be released? If not as the
>> final
>>   replacement of Futon, at least as a preview alongside the regular Futon?
> Right now Fauxton is self contained and isolated from Futon, it lives at
> /_utils/fauxton/index.html so both can be run in parallel. Its definitely
> not in feature parity with Futon yet, but the things that are there work
> reasonably well, and the more eyes we can get on it the better.

So would you say shipping Fauxton as a “PREVIEW” or “EXPERIMENTAL” in 1.4.0
is sensible? I’d like to leave this decision with the Fauxton devs.

If yes, let’s master it!

>> - Can we double check that all the legal stuff is taken care of?
> Good call, I still have COUCHDB-1710 open to update LICENSE with the
> relevant dependency license info. I'll take care of that today or tomorrow.

Cool, we should consider this blocking for the merge to master, just 
so we are entirely clean for the next release.


View raw message