On Thu, 26 Oct 2017 07:19:51 +0000 Andrew Williams <a...@andywilliams.me> said:
> Hi, > > You are absolutely right - the “show it with a smaller project and prove > it’s worth is exactly why I brought it up. I was in the process of doing so > and hit this roadblock. No intention to beat a dead horse - I actually > thought I was doing what was agreed. > > Apologies if I got the wrong end of the stick. Well I think doing this with edi is fine. is it possible to have just edi have different branch naming schemes? i don't know. if it's not then we have problems. but i think we;re on the same page atm "try this in a smaller scale and show it improves things - us that to convince everyone else". :) > Andy > > On Thu, 26 Oct 2017 at 00:58, Carsten Haitzler <ras...@rasterman.com> wrote: > > > On Wed, 25 Oct 2017 20:15:45 +0000 Andrew Williams <a...@andywilliams.me> > > said: > > > > We had this discussion before in just one place I believe until you asked > > for > > specific branch names to be allowed. You wanted us to change how we branch > > and > > work with efl/e etc. the last time. I don't remember there being agreement > > with > > you on needing a change as I don't see our current model being bad or > > broken > > or causing trouble (discussion already had) vs gitflow. I don't know why > > you're > > bringing it back up as if there wasn't a consensus already. I believe the > > last > > discussion was roughly: > > > > "There is no agreement that any change is needed. The change you propose > > does > > nothing to actually improve anything by it's proposal. It just shuffles > > chairs, > > BUT if you really think it's so much better, try it on smaller projects > > first > > and show/prove it to be worth it". > > > > Or something to that effect. Most people were just silent on the topic. > > > > > Hi list, > > > > > > This conversation seems to have now happened in many places and it seems > > > that a few key individuals don't really see why we should be looking at > > > different branching models. I understand that opinion but if we don't try > > > new things then we will never be able to engage with new process or > > > technologies so I am keen to try gitflow nonetheless. > > > > > > So at this point I would like this thread to record a definitive > > decision. > > > Will we allow reduced branch name restrictions on our git repositories or > > > not? > > > Thanks, > > > Andy > > > > > > On Mon, 23 Oct 2017 at 11:43 Andrew Williams <a...@andywilliams.me> > > wrote: > > > > > > > Hi TAsn, > > > > > > > > Thanks for the reply. In gitflow these are the standards and they need > > to > > > > work across different users hence why having the developer namespace > > is not > > > > quite enough. Additionally the hotfix is not catered for in our current > > > > scheme (as I understand it). > > > > One nice thing with gitflow is the plugin that manages all the branches > > > > for you. If you have custom schemes then every person looking to take > > up > > > > development has to configure it before getting started, so the > > defaults are > > > > best if possible. > > > > > > > > I appreciate that consistency is important but taken so stringently it > > > > means we can never try anything new... An earlier discussion on > > GitFlow led > > > > to raster saying that he would need to see it working to understand the > > > > value - so I would like to do just that. > > > > > > > > I understand that folk don't necessarily see the value, but I have done > > > > and would like to try it for the projects that I am managing. That > > > > shouldn't be too onerous I think? Also as apps move from autotools to > > meson > > > > we already have a reduced consistency between projects. > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > Andy > > > > > > > > On Mon, 23 Oct 2017 at 11:34 Tom Hacohen <t...@stosb.com> wrote: > > > > > > > >> Heya, > > > >> > > > >> I don't quite understand what you are trying to do here. I mean, I > > > >> understand you are trying to have these, but what are these branches > > > >> for? If it's for you developing your own features why not put it in a > > > >> dev branch? > > > >> > > > >> We have these enforcements because we want to enforce branch names to > > > >> follow a consistent pattern across the repos. I don't mind changing it > > > >> per se, > > > >> though: > > > >> 1. I don't really see an obvious value with gitflow. > > > >> 2. I'd prefer if it was consistent across repos. > > > >> > > > >> Maybe people don't agree with this, but my take towards the e repos is > > > >> similar to that > > > >> of the GNU project. Have everything follow similar guidelines and be > > > >> mostly similar, > > > >> making it easier for devs to jump across projects. Yes, that > > > >> consistency sometimes > > > >> comes with a price, but I think that it's worth it. > > > >> > > > >> Looking forward to hearing what other people think. > > > >> > > > >> -- > > > >> Tom. > > > >> > > > >> On Sat, Oct 21, 2017 at 4:18 PM, Andrew Williams < > > a...@andywilliams.me> > > > >> wrote: > > > >> > Hi git admins, > > > >> > > > > >> > I'm setting up gitflow on Edi but I can't push to origin because of > > the > > > >> > branch naming rules. Can you please open up the ability to have > > remote > > > >> > branches matching the patterns "develop", "feature/*", "bugfix/*", > > > >> > "release/*", "hotfix/*" and "support/*"? > > > >> > > > > >> > I'd really appreciate it thanks. > > > >> > Oh and to those who worried about "changing to develop branch is an > > > >> extra > > > >> > step" don't fear as HEAD can be pointed to develop instead of > > master if > > > >> > that's what folk are looking to have set up :) > > > >> > > > > >> > Cheers, > > > >> > Andrew > > > >> > > > > >> > -- > > > >> > http://andywilliams.me > > > >> > http://ajwillia.ms > > > >> > > > > >> > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > >> > Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most > > > >> > engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot > > > >> > _______________________________________________ > > > >> > enlightenment-devel mailing list > > > >> > enlightenment-devel@lists.sourceforge.net > > > >> > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-devel > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > >> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most > > > >> engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot > > > >> _______________________________________________ > > > >> enlightenment-devel mailing list > > > >> enlightenment-devel@lists.sourceforge.net > > > >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-devel > > > >> > > > > -- > > > > http://andywilliams.me > > > > http://ajwillia.ms > > > > > > > -- > > > http://andywilliams.me > > > http://ajwillia.ms > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most > > > engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot > > > _______________________________________________ > > > enlightenment-devel mailing list > > > enlightenment-devel@lists.sourceforge.net > > > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-devel > > > > > > > > > -- > > ------------- Codito, ergo sum - "I code, therefore I am" -------------- > > Carsten Haitzler - ras...@rasterman.com > > > > -- > http://andywilliams.me > http://ajwillia.ms -- ------------- Codito, ergo sum - "I code, therefore I am" -------------- Carsten Haitzler - ras...@rasterman.com ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot _______________________________________________ enlightenment-devel mailing list enlightenment-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-devel
