Mailing-List: contact general-help@hadoop.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: general@hadoop.apache.org
Received-SPF: neutral (nike.apache.org: local policy)
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; s=serpent; d=yahoo-inc.com; c=nofws; q=dns;
	h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:subject:
	references:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding;
	b=sovV/KcrJX6C1gZZAetjmcYOajwVTsBcmNkBeEr1wdzQ7b19O/+4wyaTesZeDBgR
Message-ID: <4C734249.1060102@yahoo-inc.com>
Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2010 09:23:45 +0530
From: Vinod KV <vinodkv@yahoo-inc.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US;
 rv:1.9.1.11) Gecko/20100713 Lightning/1.0b1 Thunderbird/3.0.6
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: "general@hadoop.apache.org" <general@hadoop.apache.org>
Subject: Re: Branching and testing strategy for 0.22
References: <ACC0BDF0-C9F5-4DBA-90C4-5B94A01CD968@apache.org>
 <20100823231705.GB26339@goodenter-lm.local>
In-Reply-To: <20100823231705.GB26339@goodenter-lm.local>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit


My first thought was also inline with Cos's. Any background we are 
missing about this?

+vinod


On Tuesday 24 August 2010 04:47 AM, Konstantin Boudnik wrote:
> If I may... why QA need source code branches rather than a sequential builds
> from the trunk (as it usually done)? Say:
>   - build qa1 is cut
>   - QA works on it and finds issues
>   - issues are reported against build qa1
>   - dev fixes some issues and mark them appropriately
>   - build qa2 is cut
>   - QA verifies that all issues from qa1 marked as 'fixed in qa2' are fixed and
>     keep going with their usual cycle.
>
> Is there anything wrong with that model? It also eliminates the need to
> maintain two branches at the same time.
>
> Cos
>
> On Mon, Aug 23, 2010 at 03:19PM, Owen O'Malley wrote:
>    
>> I'd like to get started testing 0.22.
>>
>> I plan to start making mini-branches for QA. These branches will be
>> snapshots that QA can use for testing with an expected lifetime of two
>> weeks each. Only bug fixes that are blocking QA will be applied to the
>> mini-branches and every two weeks, the base of the branch will be
>> moved to the head of trunk. This will allow QA to test a point in time
>> (possibly with required bug fixes) with requiring development to
>> continually maintain two branches.
>>
>> To simplify automated builds, I'll call the branch the final name of
>> "branch-0.22." But it will be rebased every two weeks or so.
>>
>> Are there any concerns?
>>
>> -- Owen
>>