Rich Freeman: > On Mon, Sep 15, 2014 at 7:37 AM, hasufell <hasuf...@gentoo.org> wrote: >> * repoman must be run from all related directories (or the top-level >> directory) on the latest commit that is being pushed > > This should be clarified. Does repoman need to be run on the exact > commit that is being pushed, or perhaps on a "parent" commit prior to > rebasing/merging into the master branch? (I use parent liberally > here, since that commit wouldn't be an actual parent if it were > rebased.) >
Yes, you have to rerun repoman after a rebase or merge. On the tip of the local master branch (as in: right before you try to push). Sure, this may lead to problems if repoman takes long... but that's on purpose. If your changes are that big, then they should be communicated and coordinated properly without people randomly pushing changes in between that may break yours. That's no different from what we are doing right now, except that we have now enforced consistency instead of "maybe repoman is correct, maybe not". >> >> == branching model == >> >> * the primary production-ready branch is master (users will pull from >> here), there are no non-fast-forward pushes allowed >> * there may be developer-specific, task-specific, project-specific >> branches etc (there are currently no specific rules about them) > > I suggest we at least toss out some kind of naming convention to prevent > chaos. > How about dev/<name> as the namespace for devs acting as individuals > (devs can do whatever they want below this), and project/<name> as the > namespace for projects (which can also do whatever they want below > this). If we missed anything devs should discuss on-list before just > creating random branch names. I don't really want to contrain what > people do here - just try to organize it at least a tiny bit. > Makes sense. If there are no major disagreements, I'll open a wiki page for gentoo git workflow in a few days... as a draft ofc that is open to changes.
