Hi,
On 19-Aug-2014, at 6:48 pm, Min Chen <min.c...@citrix.com> wrote:
> In that case, we should call out this procedure
>
> If (you¹re a committer) {
> Go create a hotfix branch and ask RM to pick it up
> } else {
> Go upload your patch and get RM to review your request from reviewboard
> }
>
>
> in your proposal. I don't want people to have a misunderstanding that with
> this proposal, RM is not needed anymore. Actually, RM is MORE IMPORTANT
> with this proposal.
Yes.
> Also, we should also call out the enforcement plan for this procedure.
Subjective. All committers have privilege to commit so enforcement will be
unnecessary, instead if you find an issue with anyone/anything you raise it
privately or on public dev ML just like we do it now.
> What happens if somebody still directly commits to release branch after it
> is cut? Ideally, based on this proposal, after RC is cut, we should only
> see branch merge/cherry-pick done by RM. If not, RM should revert it to
> enforce the flow.
At RM’s discretion.
Cheers.
>
> Thanks
> -min
>
>
>
>
> On 8/19/14 9:19 AM, "Rohit Yadav" <rohit.ya...@shapeblue.com> wrote:
>
>> Hey,
>>
>> On 19-Aug-2014, at 5:34 pm, Pierre-Luc Dion <pd...@cloudops.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Thanks Min for the comment, make sense.
>>>
>>> Rohit, how do we plan to managed merge request or submit one? I don't
>>> think using the mailing list to keep track of merge request is good,
>>> does
>>> https://reviews.apache.org/account/login/ is keep up to date and all
>>> merge
>>> request should go there ?
>>
>> If (you¹re a committer) {
>> Go create a hotfix branch and ask RM to pick it up
>> } else {
>> Go upload your patch and get RM to review your request from reviewboard
>> }
>>
>>> What about using Jira to follow merge request ? maybe by having a
>>> 'merge-request' issue type as sub-task?
>>
>> You may do that as long as RMs are okay with that. We don¹t want people
>> to attack RMs from too many of channels such as reviewboard, jira,
>> twitter, fb, linkedin and whatnot; sticking to just using email is
>> recommended.
>>
>>> Also I'm a bit confuse for some commit cases:
>>>
>>> Let say that I want to fix the release version display in the API doc,
>>> it
>>> is not code related right not it show as 4.2.0, it's not a bugfix or a
>>> new
>>> feature, so should I create branch + merge request or this type of
>>> commit
>>> could be push directly in the release branch (ie: 4.4) ?
>>
>> Such cases will ³depend" on your chemistry with the RM, if they¹re cool
>> you go ahead alongwith them and fix doc/build fixes directly on release
>> (4.4 in the example) branch.
>>
>> This is a reason as to why this proposal is flexible, and it does not
>> introduce any policing but gives a guideline for people to follow.
>>
>> Lastly, checking out branches and working on them using git is not
>> expensive at all, just few keyboard strokes maybe so just don¹t be afraid.
>>
>> Also, for multiple fixes feel free to do several bugfixes and ask the RM
>> to pick the fixes from that (hot/bug) fix branch.
>>
>> HTH, cheers.
>>
>>> Sorry if I add confusion...
>>>
>>> Pierre-Luc
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Tue, Aug 19, 2014 at 11:16 AM, Min Chen <min.c...@citrix.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I would rather CI be considered together with this thread, since this
>>>> thread needs to decide at what condition RM can merge a hotfix/bugfic
>>>> branch to release branch.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks
>>>> -min
>>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>>
>>>>> On Aug 19, 2014, at 8:09 AM, "Pierre-Luc Dion" <pd...@cloudops.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> +1 , CI shouldn't be another topic?
>>>>>
>>>>> What is required or missing to have CI in place?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> *Pierre-Luc DION*
>>>>> Architecte de Solution Cloud | Cloud Solutions Architect
>>>>> t 855.652.5683
>>>>>
>>>>> *CloudOps* Votre partenaire infonuagique* | *Cloud Solutions Experts
>>>>> 420 rue Guy *|* Montreal *|* Quebec *|* H3J 1S6
>>>>> w cloudops.com *|* tw @CloudOps_
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Tue, Aug 19, 2014 at 5:50 AM, Rohit Yadav
>>>>> <rohit.ya...@shapeblue.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 19-Aug-2014, at 11:29 am, Sebastien Goasguen <run...@gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>> Say you grab a patch from review board and stick it in a hotfix
>>>>>>> branch,
>>>>>> test that Šcall for merge on release branch.
>>>>>>> Do we *merge* to master or can we apply the patch directly to master
>>>>>> (git am -sŠ) ?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Once the hotfix branch is merged on release branch, we would merge
>>>>>> the
>>>>>> release branch to master, that will bring the hotfix on master as
>>>>>> well.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> We don¹t want to encourage working on master for fixes that qualify
>>>>>> for
>>>>>> release branches directly so ideally we should not git am -s the
>>>>>> patch
>>>> on
>>>>>> master. But there is scope for non-strictness for a situation needing
>>>> git
>>>>>> am -s <patch> on master directly, it would be at the discretion of
>>>>>> the
>>>> RM
>>>>>> and committers.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>> 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.
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>
>> Regards,
>> 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.
Regards,
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.
