On Wed, Oct 4, 2017 at 1:21 PM, Daniel Shahaf <d...@daniel.shahaf.name> wrote: > Bert Huijben wrote on Wed, 04 Oct 2017 11:07 +0200: >> > -----Original Message----- >> > From: Daniel Shahaf [mailto:d...@daniel.shahaf.name] >> > >> > I'd like to understand the topology / flow of changes: what ensures that >> > changes made directly to publish are not reverted by a subsequent >> > promotion of staging? >> > >> > FWIW, in the Apache CMS, a "publish" operation uses 'svnmucc rm publish >> > cp N staging publish', so it's an O(1) operation, but it literally >> > overwrites any >> > changes that may have been made directly to publish/. (I'm glossing over a >> > detail but that's the gist) >> >> I think we should just use svn merge, to avoid these problems? No CMS here. > > For clarity, I'm not proposing a move to the CMS; I'm simply pointing out that > the physical way by which commits port from staging to publish, or from > publish to staging, may be either 'svn merge + svn commit' or that 'svnmucc' > replace operation.
Yes, I think we should go for 'svn merge + svn commit'. Committing new stuff to 'staging', and merging (with complete merges, not cherry-picks) to 'publish'. It would be good for us, as a project, to use this sort of workflow in practice, as I think it's a useful workflow that's used by some Subversion users. So in the interest of eating our own dogfood ... I'm just not sure if this will always work out perfectly. - Maybe we'll have some change on staging that we don't want to merge to publish (I mean, something like showing a different header or "staging" watermark, to indicate to users that it's not the production site). That should be easy: we just 'merge --record-only' that commit to publish. - Maybe we'll do some changes directly on 'publish' (intentionally, to be quick and efficient; or accidentally). Can we just merge those to 'staging', and expect this not to be a problem when merging staging back to publish later? Where does svn stand currently with holding two branches in sync, while merges can go in either direction? -- Johan
