Yeah, I agree, as well, that ideally such a change would go into the younger branch (master, in this case) as opposed to being placed in a branch that is about to be frozen.
On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 2:25 PM, Animesh Chaturvedi < animesh.chaturv...@citrix.com> wrote: > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Chip Childers [mailto:chip.child...@sungard.com] > > Sent: Tuesday, July 23, 2013 9:36 AM > > To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org > > Cc: Jessica Wang; Brian Federle; Pranav Saxena; Ian Duffy > > (i...@ianduffy.ie) > > Subject: Re: Reformatting UI code > > > > On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 09:37:26AM -0600, Mike Tutkowski wrote: > > > One other thought here is that we might want to wait until, say, the > > > day after code freeze - if allowable - and then check in these kinds > > > of changes (basically give them special permission to go in after code > > freeze). > > > > > > I think they're valuable since they do make the code much more > > > readable, but it might be better if they go in once development is > > "frozen." > > > > The challenge with that, is that sweeping changes like this (or > > architectural changes as well) are best done *early* in a release cycle. > > The challenge we've run into here is that while 4.2 work is proceeding, > > master is open for 4.3 changes (and there is a preference that if > > something big is going to come in, nows the time to do it). > > > > Perhaps that model is what's broken? > > > [Animesh>] I concur with Chip, 4.2 is near code freeze and we have a ton > of blocker and critical to deal with. > > > > > > > > > On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 8:42 AM, Sebastien Goasguen > > <run...@gmail.com>wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > On Jul 22, 2013, at 6:54 PM, Jessica Wang <jessica.w...@citrix.com> > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > Sebastien, > > > > > > > > > > Brian and I are fix 4.2 bugs. > > > > > Any fix for 4.2 bugs should go to both 4.2 branch and master > > branch. > > > > > That's why Brian and I still need to merge our check-in between > > > > > master > > > > branch and 4.2 branch. > > > > > > > > Ok got it . > > > > > > > > Ian next time you send a patch related to the UI maybe you can set > > > > Jessica and Brian as reviewers. > > > > > > > > thanks, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Jessica > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > From: Sebastien Goasguen [mailto:run...@gmail.com] > > > > > Sent: Monday, July 22, 2013 3:53 PM > > > > > To: Brian Federle > > > > > Cc: Jessica Wang; Pranav Saxena; Ian Duffy (i...@ianduffy.ie); > > > > dev@cloudstack.apache.org > > > > > Subject: Re: Reformatting UI code > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 23 Jul 2013, at 00:34, Brian Federle <brian.fede...@citrix.com> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > >> In this case it was fine, I could resolve the conflicts by git's > > > > -Xignore-space-change and reformatting accordingly. > > > > >> > > > > >> The main issue was that I didn't see any indication that this was > > > > >> being > > > > committed from reading the discussion thread. Since we're doing a > > > > lot of bugfixing right now for 4.2, a large sweeping commit like > > > > this should at least be posted as part of thread, so that there is > > > > heads-up so that we can prepare any pending changes we have to avoid > > being blocked. > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > Ok but this is not for 4.2. It was committed to master. How is it > > > > impacting your 4.2 fixes ? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> -Brian > > > > >> > > > > >> -----Original Message----- > > > > >> From: Sebastien Goasguen [mailto:run...@gmail.com] > > > > >> Sent: Monday, July 22, 2013 3:26 PM > > > > >> To: Jessica Wang > > > > >> Cc: Pranav Saxena; Ian Duffy (i...@ianduffy.ie); > > > > dev@cloudstack.apache.org; Brian Federle > > > > >> Subject: Re: Reformatting UI code > > > > >> > > > > >> Hi jessica, > > > > >> > > > > >> Sorry this is causing you trouble. Ian us developing his ldap > > > > >> plugin in > > > > a feature branch . > > > > >> This was a UI cosmetic code change, i saw that pranav shipped it > > > > >> in RB > > > > but did not apply the patch. Since the three if us work in more or > > > > less the same time zone i applied the patch quickly to master. I did > > > > think about other UI work but since 4.2 is in feature freeze i did > > > > not think committing to master would be a problem. > > > > >> > > > > >> Moreover i did not know u were working on UI feature branches. > > > > >> Where > > > > can we look at the feature descriptions ? > > > > >> > > > > >> I suppose u could revert the patch . But for features for 4.3 i > > > > >> think > > > > it should be rebase of your feature branches . I dont think this > > > > change should be impacting 4.2 not sure why u say thats the case. > > > > >> > > > > >> Thoughts ? > > > > >> > > > > >> -Sebastien > > > > >> > > > > >> On 23 Jul 2013, at 00:07, Jessica Wang <jessica.w...@citrix.com> > > wrote: > > > > >> > > > > >>> Pranav, Ian, Sebastien, > > > > >>> > > > > >>> The problem is the duration between the time Ian brought it up > > > > >>> on the > > > > mailing list and the time Ian/Sebastien checked in the change to > > > > master branch is too short (less than 4 hours). > > > > >>> > > > > >>> Ian brought it up on the mailing list at Thu 7/18/2013 5:44 AM > > > > >>> (email > > > > subject is "Auto format javascript"). > > > > >>> Sebastien checked in Ian's change to master branch at 7/18/2013 > > > > >>> 9:34 > > > > AM (Commit hash: ad69bc8da3244b783dd003ddf3184fca2762c514). > > > > >>> > > > > >>> This is a big change of UI code. > > > > >>> In GIT's view, every line in JS files has been changed (If you > > > > >>> look at > > > > code difference in GIT's history). > > > > >>> GIT sees it as "delete all lines and add new different lines". > > > > >>> I was unable to merge my check-in from master branch to 4.2 > > > > >>> branch (or > > > > any other branch) since GIT sees JS files in master branch and other > > > > branches are totally different. > > > > >>> > > > > >>> Shouldn't this kind of big change be checked in to a different > > > > >>> branch > > > > (not master branch) first? Then, submit a merge request to > > > > community, wait for 72 hours, then merge to master branch > > eventually? > > > > >>> > > > > >>> Jessica > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > >>> -----Original Message----- > > > > >>> From: Pranav Saxena [mailto:psb...@gmail.com] > > > > >>> Sent: Monday, July 22, 2013 12:18 PM > > > > >>> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org; Brian Federle > > > > >>> Cc: Ian Duffy (i...@ianduffy.ie) > > > > >>> Subject: Re: Reformatting UI code > > > > >>> > > > > >>> Hey Brian, > > > > >>> > > > > >>> Sorry to hear that it caused merge conflicts for you . But Ian > > > > >>> did bring it up on the mailing list and I suggested him to use > > > > >>> the js beautifier tool for reformatting the js code which I > > > > >>> guess you missed probably because of the "heavy" traffic on the > > > > >>> dev list and thereafter Sebastien merged the code when the > > discussion and the reviews ended. > > > > >>> Anyways, I'll also try to ping you personally on such occasions > > > > >>> in the future to let you know if any major changes are being > > > > >>> committed. Now , probably you would need to do a lot of rebasing > > , sorry for that !! > > > > >>> > > > > >>> Thanks, > > > > >>> Pranav > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > >>> On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 12:29 AM, Jessica Wang < > > > > jessica.w...@citrix.com>wrote: > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> +1 > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>> -----Original Message----- > > > > >>>> From: Brian Federle [mailto:brian.fede...@citrix.com] > > > > >>>> Sent: Monday, July 22, 2013 11:33 AM > > > > >>>> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org > > > > >>>> Cc: Ian Duffy (i...@ianduffy.ie) > > > > >>>> Subject: Reformatting UI code > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>> Hello, > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>> Recently I discovered that all JS and UI code have been > > > > >>>> reformatted to 4 > > > > >>>> spaces: > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>> commit ad69bc8da3244b783dd003ddf3184fca2762c514 > > > > >>>> Author: Ian Duffy <i...@ianduffy.ie> > > > > >>>> Date: Thu Jul 18 15:39:28 2013 +0100 > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>> Format JS > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>> While I do appreciate people coming in to help clean up the UI > > > > >>>> code, and don't mind if we change the indent level to be > > > > >>>> consistent with the rest of the code base, this commit is > > > > >>>> causing a lot of git conflicts with various development > > > > >>>> branches I'm working on. Please give a bit more heads up in the > > > > >>>> future about this, try to CC the main UI developers about it > > > > >>>> first before committing - right now myself and Jessica Wang > > > > >>>> (jessica.w...@citrix.com) do the majority of UI > > > > development. > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>> Thanks, > > > > >>>> Brian > > > > >>>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > *Mike Tutkowski* > > > *Senior CloudStack Developer, SolidFire Inc.* > > > e: mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com > > > o: 303.746.7302 > > > Advancing the way the world uses the > > > cloud<http://solidfire.com/solution/overview/?video=play> > > > *™* > -- *Mike Tutkowski* *Senior CloudStack Developer, SolidFire Inc.* e: mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com o: 303.746.7302 Advancing the way the world uses the cloud<http://solidfire.com/solution/overview/?video=play> *™*
