No Chiradeep, Pull of the request will still be on the local committer repo and pushed to ASF infra (wip)
On Mon, Oct 20, 2014 at 7:26 PM, Chiradeep Vittal < chiradeep.vit...@citrix.com> wrote: > Won’t this proposal make GitHub the canonical repository? I don’t see ASF > infra being too happy with that. > > From: sebgoa <run...@gmail.com<mailto:run...@gmail.com>> > Reply-To: "dev@cloudstack.apache.org<mailto:dev@cloudstack.apache.org>" < > dev@cloudstack.apache.org<mailto:dev@cloudstack.apache.org>> > Date: Saturday, October 18, 2014 at 2:00 AM > To: "dev@cloudstack.apache.org<mailto:dev@cloudstack.apache.org>" < > dev@cloudstack.apache.org<mailto:dev@cloudstack.apache.org>> > Subject: [PROPOSAL] Move to github PR only during moratorium on commit > > After [1] I would like to officially bring up the following proposal. > > [Proposal] > ---- > All commits come through github PR, *even* for committers. We declare a > moratorium period (agreed suspension of activity) during which direct > commit to master is forbidden. > Only the master RM is allowed to merge PR in master (we define a master > RM). If direct commit to master is done, master RM reverts without warning. > Same for 4.5 and 4.4. branches. > ---- > > This is drastic and I am sure some folks will not like it, but here is my > justification for such a measure: > > [Reasons]: > ---- > Our commit and release processes have so far been based on the idea that > development happens on master and that a release branch is cut from master > (unstable development branch). Then a different set of community members > harden the release branch, QA and bring it to GA level. During that time > development keeps on going in master. > > This is an OK process if we have the luxury of having a QA team and can > cope with split personality of being developers and release managers. > > My point of view is that as a community we cannot afford such a split > brain organization and our experience overt the last year proves my point > (delayed release date, broken builds, features merged without warning…) > > We can avoid this by cutting a release branch from a stable one (from the > start), then as you (Daan) have mentioned several times, fix bugs in the > release branch and merge them back in the stable source of the release (be > it master). > > Feature development need to be done outside master, period. Not only for > non-committers but also for committers. And merge request need to be > called. This will help review and avoid surprises. > > New git workflow were proposed and shutdown, mostly calling for better CI > to solve quality issues. CI will not solve our quality issues alone. We > need to better police ourselves. > > To avoid long discussions, I propose this simple but drastic measure. We > move all our commits to github PR until 4.5 is out, this stands for > committers and non-committers, direct commits (especially to master) would > be reverted immediately. > ---- > > Our development and release process is broken, we cannot continue like > this, let's fix it. > > [1] http://markmail.org/thread/xeliefp3oleq3g54 > > -sebastien > -- Daan
