You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@calcite.apache.org by Stamatis Zampetakis <za...@gmail.com> on 2023/01/22 20:13:49 UTC
[DISCUSS] Drop unused branches from git repos
Hi all,
Apart from the main, site, and possibly one or two other branches, all the
rest are not used by anyone unless I am missing something.
Many of them (branch-X.Y) were generated during past releases but this
pattern stopped some time ago.
It is not a big deal keeping them around but it can be confusing for new
comers (.e.g., we still have the master branch around there) and tools
operating at repo level.
The most recent example is the INFRA team informing us about the use of
Travis in our repos I assume due to the presence of .travis.yml file in
branch-X.Y branches.
Are there any reasons for keeping them around? If not how about dropping
them.
Best,
Stamatis
Re: [DISCUSS] Drop unused branches from git repos
Posted by Chunwei Lei <ch...@gmail.com>.
+1 for the cleanup.
Best,
Chunwei
On Thu, Jan 26, 2023 at 9:05 AM Benchao Li <li...@apache.org> wrote:
> +1, thanks for the effort.
>
> Sergey Nuyanzin <sn...@gmail.com> 于2023年1月23日周一 20:02写道：
>
> > +1 for cleanup
> >
> > On Mon, Jan 23, 2023 at 9:53 AM Ruben Q L <ru...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > +1 for the cleanup.
> > >
> > > Best,
> > > Ruben
> > >
> > >
> > > On Mon, Jan 23, 2023 at 7:27 AM Alessandro Solimando <
> > > alessandro.solimando@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > +1 from me as well, keeping unused branches around is only confusing.
> > > >
> > > > Best regards,
> > > > Alessandro
> > > >
> > > > On Sun 22 Jan 2023, 22:58 Julian Hyde, <jh...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > +1
> > > > >
> > > > > There’s probably a tag for each release but let’s make sure before
> we
> > > > drop
> > > > > the branch. If any branch just has a ‘prepare for next iteration’
> > > commit
> > > > > following the release tag I’m fine dropping that commit.
> > > > >
> > > > > Julian
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > > On Jan 22, 2023, at 1:05 PM, Francis Chuang <
> > > francischuang@apache.org>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > +1 for dropping them. We should do this for both calcite and
> > > > > calcite-avatica (there shouldn't be any dangling branches for
> > > > > calcite-avatica-go).
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On 23/01/2023 7:13 am, Stamatis Zampetakis wrote:
> > > > > >> Hi all,
> > > > > >> Apart from the main, site, and possibly one or two other
> branches,
> > > all
> > > > > the
> > > > > >> rest are not used by anyone unless I am missing something.
> > > > > >> Many of them (branch-X.Y) were generated during past releases
> but
> > > this
> > > > > >> pattern stopped some time ago.
> > > > > >> It is not a big deal keeping them around but it can be confusing
> > for
> > > > new
> > > > > >> comers (.e.g., we still have the master branch around there) and
> > > tools
> > > > > >> operating at repo level.
> > > > > >> The most recent example is the INFRA team informing us about the
> > use
> > > > of
> > > > > >> Travis in our repos I assume due to the presence of .travis.yml
> > file
> > > > in
> > > > > >> branch-X.Y branches.
> > > > > >> Are there any reasons for keeping them around? If not how about
> > > > dropping
> > > > > >> them.
> > > > > >> Best,
> > > > > >> Stamatis
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Best regards,
> > Sergey
> >
>
>
> --
>
> Best,
> Benchao Li
>
Re: [DISCUSS] Drop unused branches from git repos
Posted by Benchao Li <li...@apache.org>.
+1, thanks for the effort.
Sergey Nuyanzin <sn...@gmail.com> 于2023年1月23日周一 20:02写道：
> +1 for cleanup
>
> On Mon, Jan 23, 2023 at 9:53 AM Ruben Q L <ru...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > +1 for the cleanup.
> >
> > Best,
> > Ruben
> >
> >
> > On Mon, Jan 23, 2023 at 7:27 AM Alessandro Solimando <
> > alessandro.solimando@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > +1 from me as well, keeping unused branches around is only confusing.
> > >
> > > Best regards,
> > > Alessandro
> > >
> > > On Sun 22 Jan 2023, 22:58 Julian Hyde, <jh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > +1
> > > >
> > > > There’s probably a tag for each release but let’s make sure before we
> > > drop
> > > > the branch. If any branch just has a ‘prepare for next iteration’
> > commit
> > > > following the release tag I’m fine dropping that commit.
> > > >
> > > > Julian
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > On Jan 22, 2023, at 1:05 PM, Francis Chuang <
> > francischuang@apache.org>
> > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > +1 for dropping them. We should do this for both calcite and
> > > > calcite-avatica (there shouldn't be any dangling branches for
> > > > calcite-avatica-go).
> > > > >
> > > > > On 23/01/2023 7:13 am, Stamatis Zampetakis wrote:
> > > > >> Hi all,
> > > > >> Apart from the main, site, and possibly one or two other branches,
> > all
> > > > the
> > > > >> rest are not used by anyone unless I am missing something.
> > > > >> Many of them (branch-X.Y) were generated during past releases but
> > this
> > > > >> pattern stopped some time ago.
> > > > >> It is not a big deal keeping them around but it can be confusing
> for
> > > new
> > > > >> comers (.e.g., we still have the master branch around there) and
> > tools
> > > > >> operating at repo level.
> > > > >> The most recent example is the INFRA team informing us about the
> use
> > > of
> > > > >> Travis in our repos I assume due to the presence of .travis.yml
> file
> > > in
> > > > >> branch-X.Y branches.
> > > > >> Are there any reasons for keeping them around? If not how about
> > > dropping
> > > > >> them.
> > > > >> Best,
> > > > >> Stamatis
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
>
> --
> Best regards,
> Sergey
>
--
Best,
Benchao Li
Re: [DISCUSS] Drop unused branches from git repos
Posted by Sergey Nuyanzin <sn...@gmail.com>.
+1 for cleanup
On Mon, Jan 23, 2023 at 9:53 AM Ruben Q L <ru...@gmail.com> wrote:
> +1 for the cleanup.
>
> Best,
> Ruben
>
>
> On Mon, Jan 23, 2023 at 7:27 AM Alessandro Solimando <
> alessandro.solimando@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > +1 from me as well, keeping unused branches around is only confusing.
> >
> > Best regards,
> > Alessandro
> >
> > On Sun 22 Jan 2023, 22:58 Julian Hyde, <jh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > +1
> > >
> > > There’s probably a tag for each release but let’s make sure before we
> > drop
> > > the branch. If any branch just has a ‘prepare for next iteration’
> commit
> > > following the release tag I’m fine dropping that commit.
> > >
> > > Julian
> > >
> > >
> > > > On Jan 22, 2023, at 1:05 PM, Francis Chuang <
> francischuang@apache.org>
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > +1 for dropping them. We should do this for both calcite and
> > > calcite-avatica (there shouldn't be any dangling branches for
> > > calcite-avatica-go).
> > > >
> > > > On 23/01/2023 7:13 am, Stamatis Zampetakis wrote:
> > > >> Hi all,
> > > >> Apart from the main, site, and possibly one or two other branches,
> all
> > > the
> > > >> rest are not used by anyone unless I am missing something.
> > > >> Many of them (branch-X.Y) were generated during past releases but
> this
> > > >> pattern stopped some time ago.
> > > >> It is not a big deal keeping them around but it can be confusing for
> > new
> > > >> comers (.e.g., we still have the master branch around there) and
> tools
> > > >> operating at repo level.
> > > >> The most recent example is the INFRA team informing us about the use
> > of
> > > >> Travis in our repos I assume due to the presence of .travis.yml file
> > in
> > > >> branch-X.Y branches.
> > > >> Are there any reasons for keeping them around? If not how about
> > dropping
> > > >> them.
> > > >> Best,
> > > >> Stamatis
> > >
> > >
> >
>
--
Best regards,
Sergey
Re: [DISCUSS] Drop unused branches from git repos
Posted by Ruben Q L <ru...@gmail.com>.
+1 for the cleanup.
Best,
Ruben
On Mon, Jan 23, 2023 at 7:27 AM Alessandro Solimando <
alessandro.solimando@gmail.com> wrote:
> +1 from me as well, keeping unused branches around is only confusing.
>
> Best regards,
> Alessandro
>
> On Sun 22 Jan 2023, 22:58 Julian Hyde, <jh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > +1
> >
> > There’s probably a tag for each release but let’s make sure before we
> drop
> > the branch. If any branch just has a ‘prepare for next iteration’ commit
> > following the release tag I’m fine dropping that commit.
> >
> > Julian
> >
> >
> > > On Jan 22, 2023, at 1:05 PM, Francis Chuang <fr...@apache.org>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > +1 for dropping them. We should do this for both calcite and
> > calcite-avatica (there shouldn't be any dangling branches for
> > calcite-avatica-go).
> > >
> > > On 23/01/2023 7:13 am, Stamatis Zampetakis wrote:
> > >> Hi all,
> > >> Apart from the main, site, and possibly one or two other branches, all
> > the
> > >> rest are not used by anyone unless I am missing something.
> > >> Many of them (branch-X.Y) were generated during past releases but this
> > >> pattern stopped some time ago.
> > >> It is not a big deal keeping them around but it can be confusing for
> new
> > >> comers (.e.g., we still have the master branch around there) and tools
> > >> operating at repo level.
> > >> The most recent example is the INFRA team informing us about the use
> of
> > >> Travis in our repos I assume due to the presence of .travis.yml file
> in
> > >> branch-X.Y branches.
> > >> Are there any reasons for keeping them around? If not how about
> dropping
> > >> them.
> > >> Best,
> > >> Stamatis
> >
> >
>
Re: [DISCUSS] Drop unused branches from git repos
Posted by Alessandro Solimando <al...@gmail.com>.
+1 from me as well, keeping unused branches around is only confusing.
Best regards,
Alessandro
On Sun 22 Jan 2023, 22:58 Julian Hyde, <jh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> +1
>
> There’s probably a tag for each release but let’s make sure before we drop
> the branch. If any branch just has a ‘prepare for next iteration’ commit
> following the release tag I’m fine dropping that commit.
>
> Julian
>
>
> > On Jan 22, 2023, at 1:05 PM, Francis Chuang <fr...@apache.org>
> wrote:
> >
> > +1 for dropping them. We should do this for both calcite and
> calcite-avatica (there shouldn't be any dangling branches for
> calcite-avatica-go).
> >
> > On 23/01/2023 7:13 am, Stamatis Zampetakis wrote:
> >> Hi all,
> >> Apart from the main, site, and possibly one or two other branches, all
> the
> >> rest are not used by anyone unless I am missing something.
> >> Many of them (branch-X.Y) were generated during past releases but this
> >> pattern stopped some time ago.
> >> It is not a big deal keeping them around but it can be confusing for new
> >> comers (.e.g., we still have the master branch around there) and tools
> >> operating at repo level.
> >> The most recent example is the INFRA team informing us about the use of
> >> Travis in our repos I assume due to the presence of .travis.yml file in
> >> branch-X.Y branches.
> >> Are there any reasons for keeping them around? If not how about dropping
> >> them.
> >> Best,
> >> Stamatis
>
>
Re: [DISCUSS] Drop unused branches from git repos
Posted by Julian Hyde <jh...@gmail.com>.
+1
There’s probably a tag for each release but let’s make sure before we drop the branch. If any branch just has a ‘prepare for next iteration’ commit following the release tag I’m fine dropping that commit.
Julian
> On Jan 22, 2023, at 1:05 PM, Francis Chuang <fr...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> +1 for dropping them. We should do this for both calcite and calcite-avatica (there shouldn't be any dangling branches for calcite-avatica-go).
>
> On 23/01/2023 7:13 am, Stamatis Zampetakis wrote:
>> Hi all,
>> Apart from the main, site, and possibly one or two other branches, all the
>> rest are not used by anyone unless I am missing something.
>> Many of them (branch-X.Y) were generated during past releases but this
>> pattern stopped some time ago.
>> It is not a big deal keeping them around but it can be confusing for new
>> comers (.e.g., we still have the master branch around there) and tools
>> operating at repo level.
>> The most recent example is the INFRA team informing us about the use of
>> Travis in our repos I assume due to the presence of .travis.yml file in
>> branch-X.Y branches.
>> Are there any reasons for keeping them around? If not how about dropping
>> them.
>> Best,
>> Stamatis
Re: [DISCUSS] Drop unused branches from git repos
Posted by Francis Chuang <fr...@apache.org>.
+1 for dropping them. We should do this for both calcite and
calcite-avatica (there shouldn't be any dangling branches for
calcite-avatica-go).
On 23/01/2023 7:13 am, Stamatis Zampetakis wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Apart from the main, site, and possibly one or two other branches, all the
> rest are not used by anyone unless I am missing something.
>
> Many of them (branch-X.Y) were generated during past releases but this
> pattern stopped some time ago.
>
> It is not a big deal keeping them around but it can be confusing for new
> comers (.e.g., we still have the master branch around there) and tools
> operating at repo level.
> The most recent example is the INFRA team informing us about the use of
> Travis in our repos I assume due to the presence of .travis.yml file in
> branch-X.Y branches.
>
> Are there any reasons for keeping them around? If not how about dropping
> them.
>
> Best,
> Stamatis
>