I guess plan to change to master as part of branching for 3.3.x applies
to core. Do we plan to make the same change to malhar at the same time
or while branching for 3.4? How do we handle existing open pull
requests? Will it be committer responsibility to merge them to the
master branch instead of devel-3? Do we plan to keep devel-3 around for
some time or will delete it once it is merged into the master?
Thank you,
Vlad
On 1/25/16 11:43, Thomas Weise wrote:
Looks like there is strong backing to move development to master as the
default branch.
I would suggest to make this change along with branching for 3.3.x.
Thomas
On Sun, Jan 24, 2016 at 9:15 PM, Bhupesh Chawda <[email protected]>
wrote:
+1 for master branch for development
-Bhupesh
On Sun, Jan 24, 2016 at 9:24 PM, Sasha Parfenov <[email protected]>
wrote:
+1 for primary development on master branch.
Thanks,
Sasha
On Sunday, January 24, 2016, Shubham Pathak <[email protected]>
wrote:
+1 for master branch as the default development branch.
Thanks,
Shubham
On Sat, Jan 23, 2016 at 9:04 AM, Chandni Singh <
[email protected]
<javascript:;>>
wrote:
+1 for master being the development branch
On Fri, Jan 22, 2016 at 7:08 PM, Yogi Devendra <
[email protected]
<javascript:;>>
wrote:
If you decide the make such change; please create an action item to
do
necessary changes in all documentation which refers to devel-3.
From the documentation perspective, master would be better than
devel-3.
Because, master will remain master forever (If we decide not to
change
it
yet another time). But, devel-3 will need to be eventually replaced
by
devel-4 at some time in future.
+1 for master (from the ease of maintaining documentation
perspective)
~ Yogi
On 22 January 2016 at 15:05, Priyanka Gugale <
[email protected]
<javascript:;>>
wrote:
+1 for master branch.
-Priyanka
On Fri, Jan 22, 2016 at 2:57 PM, Timothy Farkas <
[email protected]
<javascript:;>>
wrote:
+1 for master branch being the default development branch.
Thanks,
Tim
On Fri, Jan 22, 2016 at 12:23 AM, Sandeep Deshmukh <
[email protected] <javascript:;>>
wrote:
+1 for master branch as default master branch. That makes it
consistent
with what most of the other projects are following and will
have
a
smooth
experience for new users and contributors than getting into
another
branch
like devel-3.
Regards,
Sandeep
On Fri, Jan 22, 2016 at 12:14 PM, Tushar Gosavi <
[email protected] <javascript:;>>
wrote:
+1 for using default branch for active development. devel-3
if
it
can
be
made default or master.
We already saw developer opening pull request against
master
(
https://github.com/apache/incubator-apex-malhar/pull/146)
and we had to specifically tell them open pull request
against
devel-3.
Using default branch will reduce such confusion.
-Tushar.
On Fri, Jan 22, 2016 at 11:38 AM, Chinmay Kolhatkar <
[email protected] <javascript:;>
wrote:
+1 for switching trunk development to master for both
APEXCORE
and
APEXMALHAR.
I understand that current master has stable/tested
version
of
apex.
And
we
would lose that if trunk development happens on master.
Hence, to point to last stable/tested version for apex,
would
it
make
sense
to add a section about that in README.md?
I'm not sure if other Apache projects follow this way.
So,
this
is
just a
proposal.
Thanks,
Chinmay.
On Fri, Jan 22, 2016 at 7:10 AM, Vlad Rozov <
[email protected] <javascript:;>
wrote:
I'll vote for all the trunk development being done on
the
default
branch.
If there is a way to mark devel-3 as default, it will
be
as
good
as
switching all trunk development to the master branch
that
is
currently
default.
Thank you,
Vlad
On 1/21/16 17:08, Thomas Weise wrote:
That will also work but master is not needed for
released
versions.
Releases are tags and typically used through the Maven
dependencies.
People coming to github are typically contributors and
they
should
see
the
latest stable code. When we merge changes into
devel-3,
they
have
been
reviewed and tested, we cut the release branches from
devel-3.
This
is
what
should be visible by default.
Once we do major changes, we will need to do those on
another
branch.
Making changes for next major release 4.x is one such
branch
in
my
mind.
Thomas
On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 4:59 PM, Sandesh Hegde <
[email protected] <javascript:;>
wrote:
How about we just keep "devel"? and master continues
to
be
released
version.
On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 4:55 PM Vlad Rozov <
[email protected] <javascript:;>>
wrote:
If I remember correctly the idea behind using master
and
devel-3/devel-4
was to use devel-3 and devel-4 for trunks on 3.x and
4.x
and
use
master
as the latest released version.
I am not proposing to use master one way or another,
just
stating
my
understanding behind the current configuration of
the
Apex
core
and
malhar branches.
Thank you,
Vlad
On 1/21/16 15:18, Thomas Weise wrote:
It my be possible but I would question why. The
master
branch
does
not
serve any other purpose, so why not use it for
development?
On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 2:58 PM, Vlad Rozov <
[email protected] <javascript:;>
wrote:
I guess not, I think that we don't have admin
rights
to
manage
apex
core
or malhar mirrors on github.
Thank you,
Vlad
On 1/21/16 14:12, Pramod Immaneni wrote:
Can't we set a default branch in the repo to be
different
from
master?
On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 2:04 PM, David Yan <
[email protected] <javascript:;>
wrote:
Hi all,
We have been using the devel-3 branch for
development
in
both
Apex
Core
and
Apex Malhar. The reason was that we wanted to
have
the
master
branch
to
point to the latest release so that when a user
checks
out
from
our
git
repo, it's always the latest source release and it
always
works.
But on the other hand, from what I see, that is
not
what
most
active
apache
projects do. I checked Flink, Spark, Storm,
Samza,
Pig,
Hive,
and
Hadoop,
and ALL of these projects have commits on the
master
branch
that
are
at
most one day old. Apex Core on the other hand, the
last
commit
on
the
master branch was Nov, 2015, and that was when we
released
Apex
Core
3.2.0.
Because of our stale master branch, it's easy
for
someone
outside
of
the
Apex community to conclude that Apex is not very
active
compared
to
other
Apache projects.
To me, the benefits of using the devel-3 branch
are
simply
not
worth
the
potential cost. I would like to propose that we
get
rid
of
the
devel-3
branch and use the master branch for development,
instead
of
having
the
master branch always reflecting the latest release.
We
use
tags
for
that
purpose.
Please share your thoughts.
Thanks!
David
--
Regards,
Bhupesh Chawda
