I am -1 on this as well. Any git process change needs to be considered together with the quality problem we are facing now, which i believe that it is the root cause for RM manual cherry pick issue. We cannot just adopt a process by ignoring its root quality problem. Sorry that your answer here still cannot satisfy me.
Thanks -min Sent from my iPhone > On Aug 16, 2014, at 2:32 PM, "Rohit Yadav" <rohit.ya...@shapeblue.com> wrote: > > Hi Edison, > > Thank you for your email, I suggest you read my reply to Min’s email as well: > http://markmail.org/message/vytkbqhdjmhewonl > > Let me begin by saying that perhaps I was unable to capture everyone’s > imagination with my proposal, I’ll work on my writing skills and try to keep > them short and objective. > > I think I’ve an answer to satisfy your worries but if at the end of reading > this email you’re not satisfied, instead of going back and forth on this > thread we could talk on phone, Skype, GTM etc. (whatever is convenient for > you, my contact details can be found in my signature). > > Now, this voting thread (and also in the proposal thread) has nothing to do > with "enforcing quality", but has: > > 1. Change of flow: Get people more involved with release branches: get their > stuff to release branches first via a hotfix/bugfix branch and then merge -ff > (or cherry-pick) to master, feature branches etc. > > 2. Baseline protocol: Give a guideline for contributors on how to fix > something that spans multiple releases and branches, for example starting > with oldest version/release (firm) to latest and then to master (soft) etc. > > Since, I’m not trying to solve any “quality control” issue, I cannot take the > responsibility of trying to fix anything around it as well. Therefore, it > will be only fair if you could re-read what we’re voting on and return back > with your unbiased, individual and objective opinion. > >> On 16-Aug-2014, at 9:10 pm, Edison Su <edison...@citrix.com> wrote: >> >> How RM will do the control, that's something we could discuss. I know, >> current model is not scale, as RM needs to manually cherry pick commits into >> release branch. The way I thinking about, is all the commits put into >> release branch, must be put into review board, or gerrit, must be passed by >> CI and reviewers, then the commits can be put into release branch. > > Good ideas, I think you should start a proposal thread and help with > actionable items. At present, I’m not trying to address the aforementioned > challenges because it will be tricky and I don’t have a solution. This will > be important for us but will be challenging, IMHO will be time taking and > call for: > > - getting everyone’s agreement > - a change of culture > - requirement of infrastructure > - expecting everyone learning to use the new system and workflow > - workflow enforcement and policing > > I think we do have (some) CI solutions, I may be wrong but I recall Hugo made > some build job to trigger on all branches starting with “hotfix” or some > prefix, so we do have such things. This week, Ian and Sebastien found a cheap > way of having a CI for testing with simulator on TravisCI which is free (as > in cost). > >> For above reason, I am -1(binding) on your proposal for now until we solve >> the quality control problem. > > Thank you for your vote, it’s important that we don’t make a mistake. But > since the reason mentioned had nothing to do with the voting proposal I would > welcome your reconsideration. > > Cheers, > Rohit Yadav > Software Architect, ShapeBlue > M. +41 779015219 | rohit.ya...@shapeblue.com > Blog: bhaisaab.org | Twitter: @_bhaisaab > > > > Find out more about ShapeBlue and our range of CloudStack related services > > IaaS Cloud Design & Build<http://shapeblue.com/iaas-cloud-design-and-build//> > CSForge – rapid IaaS deployment framework<http://shapeblue.com/csforge/> > CloudStack Consulting<http://shapeblue.com/cloudstack-consultancy/> > CloudStack Infrastructure > Support<http://shapeblue.com/cloudstack-infrastructure-support/> > CloudStack Bootcamp Training > Courses<http://shapeblue.com/cloudstack-training/> > > This email and any attachments to it may be confidential and are intended > solely for the use of the individual to whom it is addressed. Any views or > opinions expressed are solely those of the author and do not necessarily > represent those of Shape Blue Ltd or related companies. If you are not the > intended recipient of this email, you must neither take any action based upon > its contents, nor copy or show it to anyone. Please contact the sender if you > believe you have received this email in error. Shape Blue Ltd is a company > incorporated in England & Wales. ShapeBlue Services India LLP is a company > incorporated in India and is operated under license from Shape Blue Ltd. > Shape Blue Brasil Consultoria Ltda is a company incorporated in Brasil and is > operated under license from Shape Blue Ltd. ShapeBlue SA Pty Ltd is a company > registered by The Republic of South Africa and is traded under license from > Shape Blue Ltd. ShapeBlue is a registered trademark.
