[hibernate-dev] Branching strategy in OGM

2015-02-26 Thread Sanne Grinovero
Hey all, it seems like the branch for maintenance work on OGM 4.1 is (still) called "master", while a branch "4.2" was created for future work. I'd really prefer it the other way around: create a branch "4.1" to host all changes which are needed to be backported on 4.1.x , and call "master" what w

Re: [hibernate-dev] Is HSEARCH-1786/HSEARCH-1814 on the radar

2015-02-26 Thread Sanne Grinovero
Hi Marc, those issues are certainly on the radar. Sorry we didn't work on them yet, as we're doing a big sprint on OGM currently. We'll be back on Search in a couple of weeks - I might try to give it a look before that as it seems important but I can't promise it. I don't actually remember you sh

Re: [hibernate-dev] Branching strategy in OGM

2015-02-26 Thread Gunnar Morling
We did it intentionally that way to avoid any kind of back/forward porting and keep the history linear. It's not that these branches are there for a long time, probably only until tomorrow. 4.2 is meant to be rebased onto master and finally fast-forward merged to master once 4.1.2 is out. Would be

Re: [hibernate-dev] Branching strategy in OGM

2015-02-26 Thread Sanne Grinovero
So you intend to do some evil history rewriting on branch 4.2? I don't think that's expected to happen on the reference repository. I haven't understood much of it so I'll send PRs to master and let you merge them wherever you want. Pretty sure I don't want to touch branch 4.2 myself. On 26 Febru

Re: [hibernate-dev] Branching strategy in OGM

2015-02-26 Thread Gunnar Morling
2015-02-26 16:38 GMT+01:00 Sanne Grinovero : > So you intend to do some evil history rewriting on branch 4.2? I don't > think that's expected to happen on the reference repository. > I don't see a problem with rewriting in this case. It's not master and it's not there for a long time. It's just a

Re: [hibernate-dev] Branching strategy in OGM

2015-02-26 Thread Sanne Grinovero
On 26 February 2015 at 15:44, Gunnar Morling wrote: > 2015-02-26 16:38 GMT+01:00 Sanne Grinovero : >> >> So you intend to do some evil history rewriting on branch 4.2? I don't >> think that's expected to happen on the reference repository. > > > I don't see a problem with rewriting in this case. I

Re: [hibernate-dev] Branching strategy in OGM

2015-02-26 Thread Gunnar Morling
2015-02-26 18:47 GMT+01:00 Sanne Grinovero : > On 26 February 2015 at 15:44, Gunnar Morling wrote: > > 2015-02-26 16:38 GMT+01:00 Sanne Grinovero : > >> > >> So you intend to do some evil history rewriting on branch 4.2? I don't > >> think that's expected to happen on the reference repository. >

Re: [hibernate-dev] Branching strategy in OGM

2015-02-26 Thread Sanne Grinovero
On 26 February 2015 at 18:11, Gunnar Morling wrote: > 2015-02-26 18:47 GMT+01:00 Sanne Grinovero : >> >> On 26 February 2015 at 15:44, Gunnar Morling wrote: >> > 2015-02-26 16:38 GMT+01:00 Sanne Grinovero : >> >> >> >> So you intend to do some evil history rewriting on branch 4.2? I don't >> >> t

Re: [hibernate-dev] Branching strategy in OGM

2015-02-26 Thread Gunnar Morling
2015-02-26 19:27 GMT+01:00 Sanne Grinovero : > On 26 February 2015 at 18:11, Gunnar Morling wrote: > > 2015-02-26 18:47 GMT+01:00 Sanne Grinovero : > >> > >> On 26 February 2015 at 15:44, Gunnar Morling > wrote: > >> > 2015-02-26 16:38 GMT+01:00 Sanne Grinovero : > >> >> > >> >> So you intend to

Re: [hibernate-dev] Branching strategy in OGM

2015-02-26 Thread Emmanuel Bernard
> But I didn't say it's a big problem. It's unexpected though, and I > think we had agreed that nobody would ever use push --force on the > reference repository, especially not as a standard development > procedure. No-one should ever make a rule absolute *ever*? See my point? :) We are just min