Sasha,

We should always commit code change that does not break existing features.
We may at extra partial changes that are not useful at the moment.



On Mon, Mar 26, 2018 at 5:53 PM, Sergio Pena <sergio.p...@cloudera.com>
wrote:

> Agree with that. I don't like to have master with a partial functionality.
> But we're going to work on have the full functionality before releasing 2.1
> to avoid that.
>
> On Mon, Mar 26, 2018 at 5:45 PM, Alexander Kolbasov <ak...@cloudera.com>
> wrote:
>
> > My major concern is having master branch in an inconsistent state where
> > some parts are there but some parts are not. I guess as long as new
> changes
> > do not break any existing functionality, working on master branch should
> be
> > ok, but otherwise I would be worried.
> >
> >
> > On Mon, Mar 26, 2018 at 3:13 PM, Sergio Pena <sergio.p...@cloudera.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > The plan I prefer is to commit patches on the master branch and not a
> > > feature branch. This is to avoid the issues we had with Sentry HA and
> > syncs
> > > with master. I've worked in a feature branch in the past, and we had
> > > several merge commits on the feature branch just to keep it in sync
> with
> > > master. Some people then like to merge the feature branch into master
> as
> > a
> > > one single commit which I don't like to have.
> > >
> > > Being finer grained privileges and owner privileges the only important
> > > feature that will be available in Sentry 2.1, I think it makes sense to
> > > continue with that path unless there are other features planned for 2.1
> > and
> > > we cannot guarantee to have FGP ready by 2.1?
> > >
> > > On Mon, Mar 26, 2018 at 4:28 PM, Alexander Kolbasov <
> ak...@cloudera.com>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > There is one thing I'd like to clarify. What is the plan for all the
> > work
> > > > around introducing fine-grained permissions managed by Sentry - do
> you
> > > > intend to do the work in a feature branch and merge the whole thing
> > when
> > > it
> > > > is ready - similar to the way Sentry HA was done or you intend to
> > > directly
> > > > work in master instead? I think this warrants an explicit discussion.
> > > >
> > > > - Alex
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

Reply via email to