On Wed, Dec 20, 2017 at 3:14 PM, Corey Farrell <g...@cfware.com
<mailto:g...@cfware.com>> wrote:
One thing that might improve this is if releases were merged back
to the major branch. Currently the commit "Update for
13.19.0-rc1" is on the 13.19 branch and tagged as 13.19.0-rc1. I
believe that if we added 'git checkout 13 && git merge
13.19.0-rc1' we would get better information from 'git describe
13' and tags would appear in 'git log 13 --oneline'. This would
continue working even after we delete the minor branches.
Sounds reasonable.
As a test I just ran 'git merge 13.18.4' from the current 13
branch. The merge did have 2 conflicts but that's because 13.18
was branched so long ago and a couple files that were modified in
minor releases have since been modified again or deleted. Then I
ran 'git describe 13', it said '13.18.4-404-gd5d67bb1f4'. This
tells us that my local branch had about 404 commits (including
merges) that are not part of 13.18.0-rc1 (the point where 13.18
diverged from 13 because 13.18.3 was not merged back). Merging
each tag as soon as it's created would make the results more
accurate. and (almost always) eliminate merge conflicts.
"almost always" will be an issue since it's the scripts that do the
work. It's kinda frustrating already when you're trying to get
releases out the door and something goes wrong with the script. What
conditions do you think might still cause merge conflicts?
The only wrinkle in this plan is that the '.lastclean' file is
created on the releases but it's listed in .gitignore. I think
we might be able to just get rid of the .lastclean and
.cleancount files. This Makefile hack predates the use of SVN
and I don't think it's necessary. One thing it does do is try to
enable the astdb2sqlite3 utility, but Berkely DB was last used in
Asterisk 1.8. The default is for that utility to be enabled,
that's enough. In addition the mkrelease script actually copies
.cleancount to .lastclean, I think that means it's disabled for
releases.
These kind of things we can alter to suite our needs so there
shouldn't be an issue.
On 12/20/2017 12:58 PM, George Joseph wrote:
On Wed, Dec 20, 2017 at 8:14 AM, Tzafrir Cohen
<tzafrir.co...@xorcom.com <mailto:tzafrir.co...@xorcom.com>> wrote:
On Wed, Dec 20, 2017 at 07:50:03AM -0700, George Joseph wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 20, 2017 at 2:44 AM, Tzafrir Cohen
<tzafrir.co...@xorcom.com <mailto:tzafrir.co...@xorcom.com>>
> wrote:
>
> > Off-topic:
> >
> > On Tue, Dec 19, 2017 at 01:50:03PM -0700, George Joseph
wrote:
> >
> > > Thankfully we tag EVERYTHING! :)
> >
> > asterisk(13)$ git describe
> > 13.15.0-rc1-908-ge31e3b581b
> >
> > asterisk(14)$ git describe
> > fatal: No tags can describe
'fb18797ae09a685ec71101499fb1c1c606b16397'.
> > Try --always, or create some tags.
> >
> > asterisk(15)$ git describe
> > fatal: No tags can describe
'd312068ee93ff8ce97b464f3c2ff3304e15cb3fe'.
> > Try --always, or create some tags.
> >
> >
> > I wasted half an hour yesterday trying to find out why a
build sis not
> > switch from master to 13, only to realize that the name
of the git
> > branch in the version string is always "master".
> >
> > We tag everything. But only well after it was branched
from the main
> >
> branch.
> >
>
> I'm not following you.
>
> We tag every release...
>
> $ git checkout 13.18.4
> HEAD is now at f4644317b7... Update for 13.18.4
> $ git describe
> 13.18.4
> $ git checkout 13.18
> Switched to branch '13.18'
> Your branch is up-to-date with 'gerrit/13.18'.
> $ git describe
> 13.18.4
> $
>
> We have to create the minor release branch (13.18) and do
the work there so
> that patch releases (13.18.4) are based on the minor
release branch, not
> the major branch.
Those branches are likewise short-lived branches (at least
with respect
to the number of commits). Real work is done on master, 13,
15 and such.
But when I'm on such a branch, I can't ask git on which
branch I am (not
to mention: at which stage in it).
I _think_ I understand now.
For instance: maybe whenever you tag a new release branch
(e.g. 13.18),
tag the split point as something like "13.18.base" or
"base.13.18"?
Well, that's easy enough. Toss us an issue for it.
But maybe it's just me and branches 13 and 15 are not widely
used (for
master it is irrelevant anyway).
--
Tzafrir Cohen
+972-50-7952406 mailto:tzafrir.co...@xorcom.com
<mailto:tzafrir.co...@xorcom.com>
http://www.xorcom.com
--
_____________________________________________________________________
-- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by
http://www.api-digital.com --
asterisk-dev mailing list
To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit:
http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-dev
<http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-dev>
--
George Joseph
Digium, Inc. | Software Developer
445 Jan Davis Drive NW - Huntsville, AL 35806 - US
Check us out at: www.digium.com <http://www.digium.com/> &
www.asterisk.org <http://www.asterisk.org/>
--
_____________________________________________________________________
-- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com --
asterisk-dev mailing list
To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit:
http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-dev
<http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-dev>
--
George Joseph
Digium, Inc. | Software Developer
445 Jan Davis Drive NW - Huntsville, AL 35806 - US
Check us out at: www.digium.com <http://www.digium.com/> &
www.asterisk.org <http://www.asterisk.org/>
