On 06/13/2013 01:36 PM, John Vines wrote:
Finally read through all of this.
First of all, great work Josh.
Secondly, I like what is enumerated in the document. I would like to see
the clarification on the empty merges forward in it for the sake of new
people. Additionally, in the tl;dr version it would be awesome to have
examples of it in command form as a quick ref (as I'm still not that great
with git vs. svn).
Honestly, I think this entire subject has really blown up, especially
given that it's the same exact policy we had previously (see emails re:
to David last night). See the section "Changes which affect multiple
versions (a.k.a. merging)". I'll add a tl;dr to the top of that section
which re-iterates "the developer is responsible for merging all of
his/her changes" to be super-explicit.
Thirdly, +1 Eric's suggestion to get the ticket in ASAP because we don't
know what the turn around time is. There was a large consensus on this one
on the meeting last week.
+1 renaming trunk to master
The "unstable" discussion of master/trunk should go into another thread if
it's going to be debated. Nothing is changing in the behavior of the
trunk/master because of the switch to git. If there are issues with the way
we handle master, it shouldn't be buried in another discussion thread. It's
nothing but disruptive to the current discussion at hand.
I'm happy with the email subject. I'm assuming we're sticking with all
commits reffing a ticket? Or at least all commits to the main branch(es).
Commit messages: yes, I see no reason to change that. Branches, yeah,
perhaps stuff "beneath" `<apache_id>/` is sufficient to not have
tickets, but the "upstream" branches definitely need them. I think we
can revisit this again if people want.
Lastly, can you provide some sort of date notation to the document. I just
read it now, but it seems that it's gone through a few revisions, based on
the commentary in this thread. If I'm wrong, please ignore. Otherwise, can
you just add the date you modified (even better, by section :D). Thanks
Date.. other than the last revision on the SVN CMS? I suppose I could
add a last-modified bit to the top of the page if that's deemed desirable.
And again, thanks again Josh for spearheading thing.
John
On Thu, Jun 13, 2013 at 1:16 AM, Christopher <[email protected]> wrote:
On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 11:23 PM, Josh Elser <[email protected]> wrote:
On 06/12/2013 07:09 PM, Christopher wrote:
[snip]
Added the first two situations to the bottom in a new header "Examples".
Added the third to the feature-branches discussion under
implementation>developers. I did change a few things from your txt file;
please verify.
Also tweaked an example to document usage of things like `git merge
--squash` and `git merge --no-commit`, re: Drew's comments.
Looks good to me.
[snip]
2. Subject of notification emails. See
[snip]
I like their suggestion:
git commit [%(repo_name)s]: %(shash)s - %(subject)s
However, I don't care that much, as long as it's the only thing that
ever sends to [email protected] so it's easily organized in
my mailbox.
--
Christopher L Tubbs II
http://gravatar.com/ctubbsii
