2015-01-28 22:29 GMT+01:00 Thiago Veronezi <[email protected]>:
> But if you only have master, any quick fix would bring unnecessary baggage,
> right?
> I mean, merging the fix changes from 2.x.x to master would be trivial
> because it would only contain changes for that particular fix.
>
> If the release tags are on master, for a quick fix, we would need to create
> a new branch from the latest release tag, do the fix in the new branch and
> release it again. Where would this new release tag live? Do we keep this
> new branch just to hold a minor code change for a bug fix?

If that's a fix for a recent release we just create a branch for the
release, release, tag, delete the release branch - like we'd have do
it just after the release ignoring all commit in between.

Otherwise you are back to current status = you merge all commit done
on 2.x on master which is:
1) useless
2) makes a lot of noise when done
3) makes getting started not obvious (need doc)


>
> []s,
> Thiago
>
>
> On Wed, Jan 28, 2015 at 4:17 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>> well you shouldn't rebase/merge from a lower to upper branch IMO - ie
>> it is always fixed first on mainstream then backported if needed - or
>> just dev in the lower version if specific.
>>
>> That said this doesn't justify 2.x while master = 2.x
>>
>>
>> Romain Manni-Bucau
>> @rmannibucau
>> http://www.tomitribe.com
>> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
>> https://github.com/rmannibucau
>>
>>
>> 2015-01-28 22:12 GMT+01:00 Thiago Veronezi <[email protected]>:
>> > Maybe it can be something like...
>> >
>> > Quick bug fix in 2.x.x:
>> > * You fix your issue in "2.x.x"
>> > * Call a vote for "2.x.x".
>> > * The vote passes. You merge "2.x.x" back to "master".
>> > * You create a new tag in 2.x.x -> Let's call it "tag 2.0.2"
>> >
>> > Normal 2.x.x release
>> > * You rebase "2.x.x"
>> > * You follow the same steps as the ones for "quick bug fixes in 2.x.x"
>> >
>> > This way we avoid the auxiliary branches. We just need to be sure that
>> > "2.x.x" is not a development branch. It needs to be stable. So, once we
>> > rebase it, we need to make it stable before merging it back to master.
>> > "2.x.x" is the branch that contains the release tags.
>> >
>> > []s,
>> > Thiago.
>> >
>> >
>> > On Wed, Jan 28, 2015 at 4:07 PM, Thiago Veronezi <[email protected]>
>> > wrote:
>> >
>> >> Hi,
>> >> This is what I was thinking...
>> >>
>> >> Quick bug fix in 2.x.x:
>> >> * You create a new auxiliary branch from 2.x.x. -> Let's call it "2.0.2"
>> >> as example
>> >> * You fix your issue in this new "2.0.2" branch
>> >> * Call a vote for "2.0.2".
>> >> * The vote passes. You merge "2.0.2" back to "2.x.x".
>> >> * You create a new tag in 2.x.x -> Let's call it "tag 2.0.2"
>> >> * You destroy the auxiliary branch "2.0.2"
>> >> * You merge "2.x.x"  back to master.
>> >>
>> >> Normal 2.x.x release
>> >> * You rebase "2.x.x"
>> >> * You follow the same steps as the ones for "quick bug fixes in 2.x.x"
>> >>
>> >> []s,
>> >> Thiago.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> On Wed, Jan 28, 2015 at 3:54 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <
>> [email protected]
>> >> > wrote:
>> >>
>> >>> If I have a fix to do in 2.x, where do I code? 2.x.x or master? While
>> >>> master = 2.x I'm not convinced we need it. Doesnt solve the need of a
>> >>> release branch while mvn tools are not compliant with tomee setup.
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> Romain Manni-Bucau
>> >>> @rmannibucau
>> >>> http://www.tomitribe.com
>> >>> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
>> >>> https://github.com/rmannibucau
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> 2015-01-28 21:52 GMT+01:00 Thiago Veronezi <[email protected]>:
>> >>> > Please note that having "2.x.x" covers all the requirements:
>> >>> > * master is the bleeding edge - it doesn't need to be stable
>> >>> > * no code-freeze necessary
>> >>> > * stable and ready for production "2.x.x" branch
>> >>> > * quick bug fix release possible without interrupting development on
>> >>> master
>> >>> >
>> >>> > []s,
>> >>> > Thiago.
>> >>> >
>> >>> > On Wed, Jan 28, 2015 at 3:34 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <
>> >>> [email protected]>
>> >>> > wrote:
>> >>> >
>> >>> >> well while master = 2.x.x I wouldn't create it but yes (Tomcat model
>> >>> >> basically is nice 1 maintaince branch by N-1 maintained version +
>> >>> >> trunk for last one).
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >> Romain Manni-Bucau
>> >>> >> @rmannibucau
>> >>> >> http://www.tomitribe.com
>> >>> >> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
>> >>> >> https://github.com/rmannibucau
>> >>> >>
>> >>>
>> >>
>> >>
>>

Reply via email to