Rohit, Let's change the howto-use-git page after the vote.
On Mon, Jul 28, 2014 at 6:47 PM, Stephen Turner <stephen.tur...@citrix.com> wrote: > I am +1 on the principle. > > -- > Stephen Turner > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Daan Hoogland [mailto:daan.hoogl...@gmail.com] > Sent: 28 July 2014 16:08 > To: dev > Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] git commit proces > > Let me explain a little more about this lat mail of mine. > I was assuming a lot of context that most people may not have. > We want to start working differently with respect to our release procedure > and branching habits. The proposals that are out there and about to be voted > for are going to require a lot of work of a few people and a lot of > discipline from all of us. > > My idea was to first vote for some of the habits that are part of the gitflow > discipline, but I am not strong opinionated about that. > > I do want to prevent that we go for a grand proposal to completely change our > way of moving forward (not just the way we move forward) while there are > potentially people opposing to this way of working. > > So please give a +1/0/-1 to the general idea now, so we fell comfortable > spending the time in devising a new release schedule/mechanism. > > some of the highlights are: > > it will start with 4.5 (4.4.x will be done with the old manual cherry-pick > process) it will require everybody to create a branch for every fix or > feature they will contribute. > it will require devs to work mainly on a new branch call 'develop' > it will be every bodies responsibility to ensure that 'master' is at all > times releasable > > thanks, > Daan > > On Mon, Jul 28, 2014 at 4:39 PM, Daan Hoogland <daan.hoogl...@gmail.com> > wrote: >> I am not for a grand proposal but ok, I can live with it. >> >> It would be easiest to just vote for using the gitflow model. >> Leo is preparing a page on how to do it. I don't know what the status >> is on it. The vote for my part would be on the contents of that page. >> >> On Mon, Jul 28, 2014 at 4:03 PM, Mike Tutkowski >> <mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com> wrote: >>> Yeah, I was under the impression this decision would require a vote >>> and formal announcement, if it passes. >>> >>> On Monday, July 28, 2014, Hugo Trippaers <h...@trippaers.nl> wrote: >>> >>>> Agreed, this kind of important decisions should be made by a vote. >>>> >>>> Sebastien, Daan, can one of you kick of the vote thread? Preferably >>>> with a condensed summary of the thread? >>>> >>>> Cheers, >>>> >>>> Hugo >>>> >>>> >>>> On 28 jul. 2014, at 14:07, Ian Duffy <i...@ianduffy.ie >>>> <javascript:;>> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>> > +1 to what Erik said. >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > On 28 July 2014 13:04, Erik Weber <terbol...@gmail.com >>>> > <javascript:;>> >>>> wrote: >>>> > >>>> >> On Mon, Jul 28, 2014 at 1:22 PM, Daan Hoogland >>>> >> <daan.hoogl...@gmail.com >>>> <javascript:;>> >>>> >> wrote: >>>> >> >>>> >>> H, >>>> >>> >>>> >>> I see a lot of commits happening directly on the master branch. >>>> >>> Yet there were no counter arguments against the proposed gitflow >>>> >>> and the discussion around it. This leaves me with the idea that >>>> >>> the thread is largely ignored by the community. It is my >>>> >>> understanding that we agreed never to commit anything to master >>>> >>> anymore that hasn't been first committed to a branch and is >>>> >>> merged back to master (instead of cherry-picked). What mistake in >>>> >>> thinking am I making here? >>>> >>> >>>> >>> >>>> >> >>>> >> Not familiar with bylaws and the such, but wouldn't a change like >>>> >> this require some sort of voting and potentially a more formal >>>> >> information? >>>> >> >>>> >> Requiring everyone to read through a 50+ replies mail thread and >>>> comprehend >>>> >> it could be a bit much. >>>> >> >>>> >> I would suggest an updated document that explain the expected workflow. >>>> >> >>>> >> -- >>>> >> Erik >>>> >> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> -- >>> *Mike Tutkowski* >>> *Senior CloudStack Developer, SolidFire Inc.* >>> e: mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com >>> o: 303.746.7302 >>> Advancing the way the world uses the cloud >>> <http://solidfire.com/solution/overview/?video=play>*™* >> >> >> >> -- >> Daan > > > > -- > Daan -- Daan
