On Wednesday 12 March 2014 13:59:57 Adam Spiers wrote: > [BTW no need to send to both crowbar@dell.com and crow...@lists.us.dell.com] > Sascha Peilicke (sasc...@mailbox.org) wrote: > > On the other hand, seasoned developers with an eye for beauty are > > consistently annoyed by the continued over-use of Github. > > I'd call it abuse or misuse of git rather than over-use of github, but > essentially I agree. > > > People use the "crowbar" Github > > organization for their private feature-fiddling while they should do that > > in their own fork. Whether to keep stable-release branches or use tags > > instead is a matter of taste, I believe. > > Not quite, IMHO - unmaintained stable releases should be tagged, and > maintained stable releases should be branched. At risk of stating the > obvious, this is because git tags are intended for stationary > snapshots, whereas branches are intended for tracking moving targets.
Very well written and I agree. It all depends how "moving target" is defined. So far I don't think we properly phase out "old branches". People just stop to push code there at some point. In other words, we should think about a proper release life-cycle. Dunno what that means for Dell's pile of branches, but the SUSE guys more or less informally fix at most 3 branches. That is the current dev branch (stoney) and the two releases in maintenance (pebbles aka SUSE Cloud 2.0 and roxy for SUSE Cloud 3). > > But the following examples are really a miss-use: > > remotes/crowbar/release/hadoop-2.1/master > > remotes/crowbar/release/hadoop-2.2/master > > remotes/crowbar/release/hadoop-2.3/master > > remotes/crowbar/release/hadoop-2.4/master > > > > It should be one "hadoop" branches with tags 2.1, 2.2, 2.3 and 2.4. > > That depends on whether there is an intention to maintain 2.1 > independently of 2.2 etc. Yes, closely related to the life-cycle discussion above. > > remotes/crowbar/release/mesa-1.6.1/master > > remotes/crowbar/release/mesa-1.6/master > > remotes/crowbar/release/mesa-1.7/master > > > > Same here. > > I'm not so sure - IIRC at least two of these are considered > independent releases. Ok, in that case I don't know enough about Dell guy's commitment to the mesa branches. > > remotes/crowbar/release/mesa-1.6.1/openstack-build/master > > > > WTF? Away with thee! > > Yeah there is a big WTF factor with that. It stems from the abuse of > git branches to track not only releases but also products, or builds, > or something else depending on your preferred terminology. > > > I guess that's where the most cleanup potential lies. > > I'd say removing ancient feature / topic branches is the lowest > hanging fruit. And the least controversial. -- Viele Grüße, Sascha Peilicke _______________________________________________ Crowbar mailing list Crowbar@dell.com https://lists.us.dell.com/mailman/listinfo/crowbar For more information: http://crowbar.github.com/
