You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@logging.apache.org by "Piotr P. Karwasz" <pi...@gmail.com> on 2022/10/09 12:01:45 UTC
Branch naming convention
Hello,
Since now the structure of `master` and `release-2.x` are similar,
I'll be checking `log4j-api`, `log4j-core` and `log4j-1.2-api` to see
if we forgot to apply some bug fixes to `master` (I certainly did).
It might also be the right moment to switch back to `master` as the
default branch and perform some naming changes to ensure that Github
lists the branches in order of importance.
Github seems to sort branch names lexicographically in the C locale
(digits, uppercase letters, lowercase letters) with some exceptions
for numerical values.
E.g. we can:
* rename `master` to `main` (the default Github name on new repos),
for those sensitive to the name `master`.
* rename `release-2.x` to `2.x`, `log4j-2.3.x` to `2.3.x` and
`log4j-2.12` to `2.12.x`: GitHub's ordering will be `2.x -> 2.3.x ->
2.12.x`.
* rename the feature branches to
`LOG4J2-issue_number/optional_mnemonic`. I really would like the
`/optional_mnemonic`, because I don't remember issue numbers.
* we can ask the authors to close some feature branches or move them
to their fork, if they are obsolete.
Piotr
Re: Branch naming convention
Posted by Matt Sicker <bo...@gmail.com>.
I asked some people in infra how we should handle our site since it’s currently a huge git repo. There was a suggestion of using the nightlies site publishing area with a CNAME which might work. Otherwise, we need to look at what other PMCs are doing with multi-version websites.
—
Matt Sicker
> On Oct 9, 2022, at 13:13, Ralph Goers <ra...@dslextreme.com> wrote:
>
> +0. I really don’t care. However, I would only be in favor of switch master/main/whatever to be the default if we are going to create a release.
>
> Personally, I’d prefer to be discussing how we are going to change the web site to support both 2.x and 3.x releases and make a plan to get the web site build under control.
>
> Ralph
>
>> On Oct 9, 2022, at 10:04 AM, Piotr P. Karwasz <pi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Hi Matt,
>>
>>> On Sun, 9 Oct 2022 at 18:27, Matt Sicker <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> (...) This is more of a universal sorting issue than just the GitHub UI (think git itself, or gitbox, or any external tooling).
>>
>> You are right, I tried the git executable, Eclipse and GitHub and they
>> all seem to use lexicographic order in the C locale. The only
>> differences are:
>>
>> * git sorts `2.12.x > 2.3.x > 2.x` as expected,
>> * Eclipse (JGit?) uses `2.3.x > 2.12.x > 2.x`,
>> * GitHub sorts numerical as `2.x > 2.3.x > 2.12.x`.
>>
>> Anyway we should use names that are ordered before all the
>> `dependabot` branches: e.g. let them start with a capital letter.
>>
>> Piotr
>
Re: Branch naming convention
Posted by Ralph Goers <ra...@dslextreme.com>.
+0. I really don’t care. However, I would only be in favor of switch master/main/whatever to be the default if we are going to create a release.
Personally, I’d prefer to be discussing how we are going to change the web site to support both 2.x and 3.x releases and make a plan to get the web site build under control.
Ralph
> On Oct 9, 2022, at 10:04 AM, Piotr P. Karwasz <pi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hi Matt,
>
> On Sun, 9 Oct 2022 at 18:27, Matt Sicker <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> (...) This is more of a universal sorting issue than just the GitHub UI (think git itself, or gitbox, or any external tooling).
>
> You are right, I tried the git executable, Eclipse and GitHub and they
> all seem to use lexicographic order in the C locale. The only
> differences are:
>
> * git sorts `2.12.x > 2.3.x > 2.x` as expected,
> * Eclipse (JGit?) uses `2.3.x > 2.12.x > 2.x`,
> * GitHub sorts numerical as `2.x > 2.3.x > 2.12.x`.
>
> Anyway we should use names that are ordered before all the
> `dependabot` branches: e.g. let them start with a capital letter.
>
> Piotr
Re: Branch naming convention
Posted by "Piotr P. Karwasz" <pi...@gmail.com>.
Hi Matt,
On Sun, 9 Oct 2022 at 18:27, Matt Sicker <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> (...) This is more of a universal sorting issue than just the GitHub UI (think git itself, or gitbox, or any external tooling).
You are right, I tried the git executable, Eclipse and GitHub and they
all seem to use lexicographic order in the C locale. The only
differences are:
* git sorts `2.12.x > 2.3.x > 2.x` as expected,
* Eclipse (JGit?) uses `2.3.x > 2.12.x > 2.x`,
* GitHub sorts numerical as `2.x > 2.3.x > 2.12.x`.
Anyway we should use names that are ordered before all the
`dependabot` branches: e.g. let them start with a capital letter.
Piotr
Re: Branch naming convention
Posted by Matt Sicker <bo...@gmail.com>.
I like these options. Master could be renamed “current” to put it higher up, though with the rest of the naming scheme here, it would be nice to sort before the issue branches. This is more of a universal sorting issue than just the GitHub UI (think git itself, or gitbox, or any external tooling).
—
Matt Sicker
> On Oct 9, 2022, at 07:02, Piotr P. Karwasz <pi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> Since now the structure of `master` and `release-2.x` are similar,
> I'll be checking `log4j-api`, `log4j-core` and `log4j-1.2-api` to see
> if we forgot to apply some bug fixes to `master` (I certainly did).
>
> It might also be the right moment to switch back to `master` as the
> default branch and perform some naming changes to ensure that Github
> lists the branches in order of importance.
>
> Github seems to sort branch names lexicographically in the C locale
> (digits, uppercase letters, lowercase letters) with some exceptions
> for numerical values.
>
> E.g. we can:
>
> * rename `master` to `main` (the default Github name on new repos),
> for those sensitive to the name `master`.
> * rename `release-2.x` to `2.x`, `log4j-2.3.x` to `2.3.x` and
> `log4j-2.12` to `2.12.x`: GitHub's ordering will be `2.x -> 2.3.x ->
> 2.12.x`.
> * rename the feature branches to
> `LOG4J2-issue_number/optional_mnemonic`. I really would like the
> `/optional_mnemonic`, because I don't remember issue numbers.
> * we can ask the authors to close some feature branches or move them
> to their fork, if they are obsolete.
>
> Piotr
Re: Branch naming convention
Posted by Volkan Yazıcı <vo...@yazi.ci>.
Great initiative Piotr!
I support all changes you have suggested in the post.
Please make sure GitHub CI still works (including publications of snapshot
artifacts) after changes.
And yes, please delete abandoned branches.
On Sun, Oct 9, 2022 at 2:02 PM Piotr P. Karwasz <pi...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Since now the structure of `master` and `release-2.x` are similar,
> I'll be checking `log4j-api`, `log4j-core` and `log4j-1.2-api` to see
> if we forgot to apply some bug fixes to `master` (I certainly did).
>
> It might also be the right moment to switch back to `master` as the
> default branch and perform some naming changes to ensure that Github
> lists the branches in order of importance.
>
> Github seems to sort branch names lexicographically in the C locale
> (digits, uppercase letters, lowercase letters) with some exceptions
> for numerical values.
>
> E.g. we can:
>
> * rename `master` to `main` (the default Github name on new repos),
> for those sensitive to the name `master`.
> * rename `release-2.x` to `2.x`, `log4j-2.3.x` to `2.3.x` and
> `log4j-2.12` to `2.12.x`: GitHub's ordering will be `2.x -> 2.3.x ->
> 2.12.x`.
> * rename the feature branches to
> `LOG4J2-issue_number/optional_mnemonic`. I really would like the
> `/optional_mnemonic`, because I don't remember issue numbers.
> * we can ask the authors to close some feature branches or move them
> to their fork, if they are obsolete.
>
> Piotr
>