Hi folks, co-incidentally, CVS has just begun to give me some pain last Friday, when it came to actually working with the different branches I now have. And a rainy Sunday made my have a deep look at the git manual. End result: I won't wait 10 weeks from now but have started to finally convert. I have pulled Michael Biebl's git repository, which he thankfully kept synchronized with the CVS. I am doing some final checks right now, but as it looks we will be using git from now on. Rsyslog is available from Adiscon's gitweb:
http://git.adiscon.com/ It can also be pulled via git protocol. Please keep in mind that it may receive some more finishing touches. I will now have four active branches: - v2-stable - v3-stable - beta -- what becomes the next release of v3-stable - master -- the current (b)leading development edge There is also v1-stable, which is deprecated and a few legacy branches. As suggested by Raoul and Michael, I'll now begin to work with feature-branches (as soon as I have finished current work in progress). I am new to git and I may mess up things. Bear with me if I do ;) Please note that I am still working on the initial setup, so if you pull the repository now, you may need to pull it again some time later ;) If I mess up, I'll let you know via the mailing list. I hope this will be a good move. Special thanks to Michael and Raoul, who were persistent enough to finally made me move (and, well, to CVS which provided the final bit of motivation ;)). Rainer > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:rsyslog- > [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Rainer Gerhards > Sent: Friday, April 04, 2008 12:18 PM > To: rsyslog-users > Subject: Re: [rsyslog] rsyslog version numbering > > OK, let me come to a conclusion ;) > > What Michael writes and Raoul suggested makes an awful lot of sense. > Right now, I have two problems: > > a) we are still having a bit of trouble with the git transistion of > rsyslog - I hope to have that sorted out soon > b) I need to invest some time to fully understand how git branches. > > The bigger problem is probably b). Thankfully, I have started to work > with git on librelp and it was a very good experience. It still looks > like I need to invest at least a day or two more into getting fully > involved with it. That doesn't sound much, but there is a lot I can do > in rsyslog in this time. > > I think I will proceed as follows: > > For the next few weeks, I'll use the scheme that I outlined this > morning. It works and it is sufficiently clean for the time being. > Especially as I don't see any reason for gaps, there is no such major > overhaul in sight. > > While I do so, I'll get more acquainted to git and see how I can make > utilize its branching capabilities. At some point in time (and if > everything works as well as advertised, what I assume ;)), I'll switch > to the git feature branch strategy. My hope is all this can be done in > the next 10 weeks or so. > > I hope I don't disappoint anyone - but the problem is things to do. All > needs to go by priorities and, quite honestly, TLS or the new config > file format is higher on my priority scale than the branching strategy. > And, yes, I know good knowledge with git will save in the long run. But > I need to start somewhere ;) > > I someone has serious concerns on the route I am taking, please scream > now ;) > > Rainer > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:rsyslog- > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Michael Biebl > > Sent: Friday, April 04, 2008 12:02 PM > > To: rsyslog-users > > Subject: Re: [rsyslog] rsyslog version numbering > > > > 2008/4/4, Rainer Gerhards <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > > 2008/4/4, Rainer Gerhards <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > > > > > > > > 999.2.0 - stable > > > > > 999.3.x - big overhaul feature, stabilizing > > > > > 999.5.x - .3 + next focus feature, stabilizing > > > > > 999.7.x - .5 + next focus feature, stabilizing > > > > > 999.9.x - devel > > > > > > > > > > Again... comments please ;) > > > > > > > > I think you really should try to use git feature branches for > > that. > > > > Have a stable and master (development) branch, and develop the > > > > features in separate topic branches feature-A, feature-B etc. > > > > Whenever one feature is ready, merge it into master. > > > > This way, it doesn't matter which feature you have to > concentrate > > on > > > > is released first (no skipped version numbers!). > > > > The strong merge suppport in git would also allow to cherrypick > > easily > > > > from the different feature branches or merge between them. > > > > > > > > > Sounds good, but a honest question (NOT trying to give a bias, just > a > > > problem description): > > > > > > While I implement FocusFeatureX, I get Feature 1, 2, 3 requests > and > > > implement them - all while FocusFeatureX is being developed. Where > > do I > > > apply these? And don't I get into trouble if that interferes with > > things > > > that I do in FocusFeatureX? Remember, I change a couple of > hundered > > > lines all over the project on a typical day... > > > > Say you work on a featureA branch. Now you get an unrelated feature > > request for featureB. > > You'd switch back to current master, and branch of featureB, starting > > to work on that. > > By the end of the day, say featureB is ready, you'd merge those > branch > > back into master (and delete branch featureB if no longer required). > > If featureC is dependend on featureA, you can branch from there. If > > you now work again on featureA, and later on featureC, you can merge > > the new commits from featureA back into featureC again. > > Later, when featureA and C are ready, you merge them into master > again. > > For small changes, I'd directly work on master and commit there. > There > > is also a nice feature called git-stash, which allows to put > > uncommitted changes away, work temporarily on other stuff, an get > back > > to the uncommited stuff later. > > > > I'd say, just test git and try to get a "feeling" for it. That > > probably helps to make a better decision. > > > > Cheers, > > Michael > > > > > > > > -- > > Why is it that all of the instruments seeking intelligent life in the > > universe are pointed away from Earth? > > _______________________________________________ > > rsyslog mailing list > > http://lists.adiscon.net/mailman/listinfo/rsyslog > _______________________________________________ > rsyslog mailing list > http://lists.adiscon.net/mailman/listinfo/rsyslog _______________________________________________ rsyslog mailing list http://lists.adiscon.net/mailman/listinfo/rsyslog
