You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@training.apache.org by Christofer Dutz <ch...@c-ware.de> on 2020/08/25 20:52:52 UTC
"master" is now officially "develop" ...
Ok ...
I've created the develop branch, infra made that the new default and unlocked the old master branch.
After confirming all is in place I then deleted the master (locally and remotely)
So I think this issue can be considered done.
Will initiate the RC of the tools as soon as I find some spare time.
Chris
Am 22.08.20, 19:42 schrieb "Christofer Dutz" <ch...@c-ware.de>:
Hi all,
So the vote passes with (as far as I could see it)
6 binding +1
2 non-binding +1
And no other votes.
I'll take care of the necessary steps.
Thanks for voting :.)
Chris
Am 19.08.20, 22:06 schrieb "Brahma Reddy Battula" <br...@apache.org>:
+1 (non-bonding)
One suggestion:: May be I am too late..
Can have “trunk” and cut branches when we are planing to have release
(based on version) ??
On Wed, 19 Aug 2020 at 10:43 PM, gautam gupta <gr...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Adding my 2 cents. In the past, I have seen both the models. Keeping two
>
> branches: One for Develop and another for Releases. At the same time, I
>
> have also found tagging the releases to be sufficient.
>
>
>
> IMHO, we can go for the model that needs less maintenance & operational
>
> effort for our project.
>
>
>
> +1 for Chris's approach
>
>
>
> thanks,
>
> Gautam
>
>
>
> On Wed, Aug 19, 2020 at 1:50 AM Ryan Skraba <ry...@skraba.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > Hello,
>
> >
>
> > As an aside, there's some specific meanings for the develop branch and
>
> > release branches associated with the "git flow" methodology[1]. I
>
> > don't think we're proposing to adopt this specific way of working, but
>
> > it might look like it!
>
> >
>
> > In the proposed sense, "develop" matches perfectly, but "release" for
>
> > the latest release isn't very common. In my experience, tagging
>
> > releases has been sufficient.
>
> >
>
> > Regardless, as long as we're clear in the documentation for
>
> > contributors: +1 (non)
>
> >
>
> > Thanks! Ryan
>
> >
>
> > [1] https://datasift.github.io/gitflow/IntroducingGitFlow.html
>
> >
>
> > On Tue, Aug 18, 2020 at 11:54 PM Justin Mclean <justin@classsoftware.com
> >
>
> > wrote:
>
> > >
>
> > > +1
>
> >
>
> --
--Brahma Reddy Battula
Re: "master" is now officially "develop" ...
Posted by Lars Francke <la...@gmail.com>.
Great, thank you Chris and gautam for checking
On Wed, Aug 26, 2020 at 11:43 AM Christofer Dutz <ch...@c-ware.de>
wrote:
> Cool ... thanks for the feedback ...
>
> As soon as we released the tools at least once, contributing will be a lot
> simpler as the archetype is then publicly available.
> Would then probably write or adjust the existing training website and hope
> we get more life into this project.
>
> Chris
>
>
>
> Am 26.08.20, 03:20 schrieb "gautam gupta" <gr...@gmail.com>:
>
> Hi Chris,
> Yes, I tried building some of my slides. They look good to me. Seems
> like
> no impact from the content perspective.
>
> thanks,
> Gautam
>
> On Tue, Aug 25, 2020 at 1:53 PM Christofer Dutz <
> christofer.dutz@c-ware.de>
> wrote:
>
> > Ok ...
> >
> > I've created the develop branch, infra made that the new default and
> > unlocked the old master branch.
> > After confirming all is in place I then deleted the master (locally
> and
> > remotely)
> >
> > So I think this issue can be considered done.
> >
> > Will initiate the RC of the tools as soon as I find some spare time.
> >
> > Chris
> >
> >
> >
> > Am 22.08.20, 19:42 schrieb "Christofer Dutz" <
> christofer.dutz@c-ware.de>:
> >
> > Hi all,
> >
> > So the vote passes with (as far as I could see it)
> >
> > 6 binding +1
> > 2 non-binding +1
> >
> > And no other votes.
> >
> > I'll take care of the necessary steps.
> >
> > Thanks for voting :.)
> >
> > Chris
> >
> > Am 19.08.20, 22:06 schrieb "Brahma Reddy Battula" <
> brahma@apache.org>:
> >
> > +1 (non-bonding)
> >
> > One suggestion:: May be I am too late..
> >
> > Can have “trunk” and cut branches when we are planing to
> have
> > release
> > (based on version) ??
> >
> >
> >
> > On Wed, 19 Aug 2020 at 10:43 PM, gautam gupta <
> > greatgautam@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > Adding my 2 cents. In the past, I have seen both the
> models.
> > Keeping two
> > >
> > > branches: One for Develop and another for Releases. At the
> same
> > time, I
> > >
> > > have also found tagging the releases to be sufficient.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > IMHO, we can go for the model that needs less maintenance &
> > operational
> > >
> > > effort for our project.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > +1 for Chris's approach
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > thanks,
> > >
> > > Gautam
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On Wed, Aug 19, 2020 at 1:50 AM Ryan Skraba <
> ryan@skraba.com>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > > Hello,
> > >
> > > >
> > >
> > > > As an aside, there's some specific meanings for the
> develop
> > branch and
> > >
> > > > release branches associated with the "git flow"
> > methodology[1]. I
> > >
> > > > don't think we're proposing to adopt this specific way of
> > working, but
> > >
> > > > it might look like it!
> > >
> > > >
> > >
> > > > In the proposed sense, "develop" matches perfectly, but
> > "release" for
> > >
> > > > the latest release isn't very common. In my experience,
> > tagging
> > >
> > > > releases has been sufficient.
> > >
> > > >
> > >
> > > > Regardless, as long as we're clear in the documentation
> for
> > >
> > > > contributors: +1 (non)
> > >
> > > >
> > >
> > > > Thanks! Ryan
> > >
> > > >
> > >
> > > > [1]
> https://datasift.github.io/gitflow/IntroducingGitFlow.html
> > >
> > > >
> > >
> > > > On Tue, Aug 18, 2020 at 11:54 PM Justin Mclean <
> > justin@classsoftware.com
> > > >
> > >
> > > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > > +1
> > >
> > > >
> > >
> > > --
> >
> >
> >
> > --Brahma Reddy Battula
> >
> >
> >
>
>
Re: "master" is now officially "develop" ...
Posted by Christofer Dutz <ch...@c-ware.de>.
Cool ... thanks for the feedback ...
As soon as we released the tools at least once, contributing will be a lot simpler as the archetype is then publicly available.
Would then probably write or adjust the existing training website and hope we get more life into this project.
Chris
Am 26.08.20, 03:20 schrieb "gautam gupta" <gr...@gmail.com>:
Hi Chris,
Yes, I tried building some of my slides. They look good to me. Seems like
no impact from the content perspective.
thanks,
Gautam
On Tue, Aug 25, 2020 at 1:53 PM Christofer Dutz <ch...@c-ware.de>
wrote:
> Ok ...
>
> I've created the develop branch, infra made that the new default and
> unlocked the old master branch.
> After confirming all is in place I then deleted the master (locally and
> remotely)
>
> So I think this issue can be considered done.
>
> Will initiate the RC of the tools as soon as I find some spare time.
>
> Chris
>
>
>
> Am 22.08.20, 19:42 schrieb "Christofer Dutz" <ch...@c-ware.de>:
>
> Hi all,
>
> So the vote passes with (as far as I could see it)
>
> 6 binding +1
> 2 non-binding +1
>
> And no other votes.
>
> I'll take care of the necessary steps.
>
> Thanks for voting :.)
>
> Chris
>
> Am 19.08.20, 22:06 schrieb "Brahma Reddy Battula" <br...@apache.org>:
>
> +1 (non-bonding)
>
> One suggestion:: May be I am too late..
>
> Can have “trunk” and cut branches when we are planing to have
> release
> (based on version) ??
>
>
>
> On Wed, 19 Aug 2020 at 10:43 PM, gautam gupta <
> greatgautam@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > Adding my 2 cents. In the past, I have seen both the models.
> Keeping two
> >
> > branches: One for Develop and another for Releases. At the same
> time, I
> >
> > have also found tagging the releases to be sufficient.
> >
> >
> >
> > IMHO, we can go for the model that needs less maintenance &
> operational
> >
> > effort for our project.
> >
> >
> >
> > +1 for Chris's approach
> >
> >
> >
> > thanks,
> >
> > Gautam
> >
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Aug 19, 2020 at 1:50 AM Ryan Skraba <ry...@skraba.com>
> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > > Hello,
> >
> > >
> >
> > > As an aside, there's some specific meanings for the develop
> branch and
> >
> > > release branches associated with the "git flow"
> methodology[1]. I
> >
> > > don't think we're proposing to adopt this specific way of
> working, but
> >
> > > it might look like it!
> >
> > >
> >
> > > In the proposed sense, "develop" matches perfectly, but
> "release" for
> >
> > > the latest release isn't very common. In my experience,
> tagging
> >
> > > releases has been sufficient.
> >
> > >
> >
> > > Regardless, as long as we're clear in the documentation for
> >
> > > contributors: +1 (non)
> >
> > >
> >
> > > Thanks! Ryan
> >
> > >
> >
> > > [1] https://datasift.github.io/gitflow/IntroducingGitFlow.html
> >
> > >
> >
> > > On Tue, Aug 18, 2020 at 11:54 PM Justin Mclean <
> justin@classsoftware.com
> > >
> >
> > > wrote:
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > +1
> >
> > >
> >
> > --
>
>
>
> --Brahma Reddy Battula
>
>
>
Re: "master" is now officially "develop" ...
Posted by gautam gupta <gr...@gmail.com>.
Hi Chris,
Yes, I tried building some of my slides. They look good to me. Seems like
no impact from the content perspective.
thanks,
Gautam
On Tue, Aug 25, 2020 at 1:53 PM Christofer Dutz <ch...@c-ware.de>
wrote:
> Ok ...
>
> I've created the develop branch, infra made that the new default and
> unlocked the old master branch.
> After confirming all is in place I then deleted the master (locally and
> remotely)
>
> So I think this issue can be considered done.
>
> Will initiate the RC of the tools as soon as I find some spare time.
>
> Chris
>
>
>
> Am 22.08.20, 19:42 schrieb "Christofer Dutz" <ch...@c-ware.de>:
>
> Hi all,
>
> So the vote passes with (as far as I could see it)
>
> 6 binding +1
> 2 non-binding +1
>
> And no other votes.
>
> I'll take care of the necessary steps.
>
> Thanks for voting :.)
>
> Chris
>
> Am 19.08.20, 22:06 schrieb "Brahma Reddy Battula" <br...@apache.org>:
>
> +1 (non-bonding)
>
> One suggestion:: May be I am too late..
>
> Can have “trunk” and cut branches when we are planing to have
> release
> (based on version) ??
>
>
>
> On Wed, 19 Aug 2020 at 10:43 PM, gautam gupta <
> greatgautam@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > Adding my 2 cents. In the past, I have seen both the models.
> Keeping two
> >
> > branches: One for Develop and another for Releases. At the same
> time, I
> >
> > have also found tagging the releases to be sufficient.
> >
> >
> >
> > IMHO, we can go for the model that needs less maintenance &
> operational
> >
> > effort for our project.
> >
> >
> >
> > +1 for Chris's approach
> >
> >
> >
> > thanks,
> >
> > Gautam
> >
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Aug 19, 2020 at 1:50 AM Ryan Skraba <ry...@skraba.com>
> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > > Hello,
> >
> > >
> >
> > > As an aside, there's some specific meanings for the develop
> branch and
> >
> > > release branches associated with the "git flow"
> methodology[1]. I
> >
> > > don't think we're proposing to adopt this specific way of
> working, but
> >
> > > it might look like it!
> >
> > >
> >
> > > In the proposed sense, "develop" matches perfectly, but
> "release" for
> >
> > > the latest release isn't very common. In my experience,
> tagging
> >
> > > releases has been sufficient.
> >
> > >
> >
> > > Regardless, as long as we're clear in the documentation for
> >
> > > contributors: +1 (non)
> >
> > >
> >
> > > Thanks! Ryan
> >
> > >
> >
> > > [1] https://datasift.github.io/gitflow/IntroducingGitFlow.html
> >
> > >
> >
> > > On Tue, Aug 18, 2020 at 11:54 PM Justin Mclean <
> justin@classsoftware.com
> > >
> >
> > > wrote:
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > +1
> >
> > >
> >
> > --
>
>
>
> --Brahma Reddy Battula
>
>
>