incubator-couchdb-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Randall Leeds <randall.le...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [REQUEST] Update on using git
Date Wed, 05 Jun 2013 01:37:15 GMT
I'll drive this. Let me try to wrangle a draft proposal together.
Dirkjan replied to me and that feedback is helpful.

On Tue, Jun 4, 2013 at 2:55 PM, Noah Slater <nslater@apache.org> wrote:
> Note: I don't mean to put this on Bob. Anyone could drive this. But I do
> think it needs a driver. Bob, Randall, and Dirkjan all seem to have the
> most detailed thoughts on the subject, so I suggest one you might be in the
> best position.
>
> And to clarify: someone disagreeing with you isn't a blocker. We're aiming
> for discussion-lead decision-making. Feel free to supply the
> "decision-making" that compliments the "discussion-lead" part. ;)
>
>
> On 4 June 2013 22:36, Noah Slater <nslater@apache.org> wrote:
>
>> Odd way to phrase it. Alternative proposals should not be
>> a destructive part of the process. The goal here is to generate ideas, toss
>> out the ones that don't work, pick your favourite, and drive consensus on
>> it.
>>
>> So, there are two possible ways I can see this unfolding:
>>
>>  * Everyone agrees with you that the git-flow stuff is not needed, in
>> which case, great. Work everyone's comments in to the original proposal,
>> and then move it from DISCUSS to VOTE.
>>
>>  * There is still some disagreement about what we want to do. In this
>> case, I agree, we do not have consensus. (I wouldn't describe this as
>> a destruction of coherency. Instead: productive discussion!) The next
>> step forward in this instances is to drive that discussion, and hopefully
>> come out with a proposal that most people like.
>>
>> I note that Randal posted several mails, and so did Dirkjan. But nobody
>> has responded to them. A good way to kick this off again would be to
>> respond to those points, I think.
>>
>> I would love to drive this, but I can't, mostly because I have no idea
>> what I'm talking about when it comes to Git. ;)
>>
>>
>> On 4 June 2013 19:03, Robert Newson <rnewson@apache.org> wrote:
>>
>>> Heh, if I felt I could conclude that thread I would have done so
>>> already. We had a reasonably well described approach at one point and
>>> coherency was destroyed by a late appearance of the git-flow
>>> alternative.
>>>
>>> B.
>>>
>>>
>>> On 4 June 2013 18:43, Noah Slater <nslater@apache.org> wrote:
>>> > This thread is concluded. :) I meant the "[DISCUSS] Git workflow"
>>> thread.
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > On 4 June 2013 18:41, Robert Newson <rnewson@apache.org> wrote:
>>> >
>>> >> What's not concluded in this thread?
>>> >>
>>> >> B.
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >> On 4 June 2013 18:04, Noah Slater <nslater@apache.org> wrote:
>>> >> > Bob, are you able to help drive the Git thread to conclusion? We
>>> need to
>>> >> > clarify this and document it. Think a lot people are confused right
>>> now
>>> >> > since it seems everything is in the air.
>>> >> >
>>> >> >
>>> >> > On 31 May 2013 16:51, Robert Newson <rnewson@apache.org>
wrote:
>>> >> >
>>> >> >> master, as usual, and the x.y.z branches (for backports). All
other
>>> >> >> branches should be feature or fix branches we've not deleted.
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> B.
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> On 31 May 2013 16:47, Wendall Cada <wendallc@apache.org>
wrote:
>>> >> >> > I'm fairly well versed in using git and different workflows,
>>> rebase,
>>> >> etc.
>>> >> >> > However, I'm utterly confused as to how I might contribute
>>> changes to
>>> >> >> > couchdb, what branches are relevant, etc. Is there documentation
>>> for
>>> >> >> this,
>>> >> >> > or a clear summary of decisions made?
>>> >> >> >
>>> >> >> > Thanks,
>>> >> >> >
>>> >> >> > Wendall
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >
>>> >> >
>>> >> >
>>> >> > --
>>> >> > NS
>>> >>
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > --
>>> > NS
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> NS
>>
>
>
>
> --
> NS

Mime
View raw message