You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@cloudstack.apache.org by Rohit Yadav <ro...@shapeblue.com> on 2014/08/13 00:04:25 UTC

Should we remove all the -forward branches?

I remember we agreed to not use the -forward branches, so can we get rid of them please?

I was reviewing someone’s patch and they had targeted that for 4.3.0-forward, though this branch is far behind than 4.3 branch; so does not make sense to merge their work on the forward branch. I’m going ahead with the main branches as I see they are already ahead of the forward branches.

Comments?

Regards,
Rohit Yadav
Software Architect, ShapeBlue
M. +41 779015219 | rohit.yadav@shapeblue.com
Blog: bhaisaab.org | Twitter: @_bhaisaab



Find out more about ShapeBlue and our range of CloudStack related services

IaaS Cloud Design & Build<http://shapeblue.com/iaas-cloud-design-and-build//>
CSForge – rapid IaaS deployment framework<http://shapeblue.com/csforge/>
CloudStack Consulting<http://shapeblue.com/cloudstack-consultancy/>
CloudStack Infrastructure Support<http://shapeblue.com/cloudstack-infrastructure-support/>
CloudStack Bootcamp Training Courses<http://shapeblue.com/cloudstack-training/>

This email and any attachments to it may be confidential and are intended solely for the use of the individual to whom it is addressed. Any views or opinions expressed are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of Shape Blue Ltd or related companies. If you are not the intended recipient of this email, you must neither take any action based upon its contents, nor copy or show it to anyone. Please contact the sender if you believe you have received this email in error. Shape Blue Ltd is a company incorporated in England & Wales. ShapeBlue Services India LLP is a company incorporated in India and is operated under license from Shape Blue Ltd. Shape Blue Brasil Consultoria Ltda is a company incorporated in Brasil and is operated under license from Shape Blue Ltd. ShapeBlue SA Pty Ltd is a company registered by The Republic of South Africa and is traded under license from Shape Blue Ltd. ShapeBlue is a registered trademark.

Re: Should we remove all the -forward branches?

Posted by Daan Hoogland <da...@gmail.com>.
4.4-forward should be removed. I have let it be as for a cooldown
period. It has conflicts with 4.4 and I want to have a branch per
fix/backport to merge. Leo's advice was to merge them as --no-ff. I
haven't which has resulted in no merge commits in some cases. For
single commits this is allright.

At the moment I would not want any features for 4.4.1 on 4.4. We are
effectively in a code freeze now. In general I am not against this
practice. Let's not be to generous with this. features are our measure
of moving forward.

As for contacting RMs: In older branches you should only have to when
a release is planned/announced. If not there is no reason to wait for
anyone else.

On Wed, Aug 13, 2014 at 10:25 AM, Rohit Yadav <ro...@shapeblue.com> wrote:
> Hey,
>
> On 13-Aug-2014, at 5:12 am, David Nalley <da...@gnsa.us> wrote:
>
>> On Tue, Aug 12, 2014 at 6:04 PM, Rohit Yadav <ro...@shapeblue.com> wrote:
>>> I remember we agreed to not use the -forward branches, so can we get rid of them please?
>>>
>>> I was reviewing someone’s patch and they had targeted that for 4.3.0-forward, though this branch is far behind than 4.3 branch; so does not make sense to merge their work on the forward branch. I’m going ahead with the main branches as I see they are already ahead of the forward branches.
>>>
>>
>> I think Sebastien was working on a 4.3.1 release. (and acting as its
>> release manager) Perhaps worth asking him.
>
> I think no one is using the forward branches and all of them are behind the main release/support branches (you may check yourself), so let’s get rid of them?
>
> Few questions around support branches such as 4.3, 4.2 etc:
> - Do we have any norm on backporting changes, or we do it already? If we don’t should we discuss doing something like this as many opensource project do it?
> - While backporting should it be only bugfixes or we can backport useful features?
> - To backport any bugfix or change, how do we commit them on old release/support branches such as 4.2, 4.3 etc.? Do we directly commit on them or ask present RMs?
>
> Regards,
> Rohit Yadav
> Software Architect, ShapeBlue
> M. +41 779015219 | rohit.yadav@shapeblue.com
> Blog: bhaisaab.org | Twitter: @_bhaisaab
>
>
>
> Find out more about ShapeBlue and our range of CloudStack related services
>
> IaaS Cloud Design & Build<http://shapeblue.com/iaas-cloud-design-and-build//>
> CSForge – rapid IaaS deployment framework<http://shapeblue.com/csforge/>
> CloudStack Consulting<http://shapeblue.com/cloudstack-consultancy/>
> CloudStack Infrastructure Support<http://shapeblue.com/cloudstack-infrastructure-support/>
> CloudStack Bootcamp Training Courses<http://shapeblue.com/cloudstack-training/>
>
> This email and any attachments to it may be confidential and are intended solely for the use of the individual to whom it is addressed. Any views or opinions expressed are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of Shape Blue Ltd or related companies. If you are not the intended recipient of this email, you must neither take any action based upon its contents, nor copy or show it to anyone. Please contact the sender if you believe you have received this email in error. Shape Blue Ltd is a company incorporated in England & Wales. ShapeBlue Services India LLP is a company incorporated in India and is operated under license from Shape Blue Ltd. Shape Blue Brasil Consultoria Ltda is a company incorporated in Brasil and is operated under license from Shape Blue Ltd. ShapeBlue SA Pty Ltd is a company registered by The Republic of South Africa and is traded under license from Shape Blue Ltd. ShapeBlue is a registered trademark.



-- 
Daan

Re: Should we remove all the -forward branches?

Posted by Sebastien Goasguen <ru...@gmail.com>.
On Aug 13, 2014, at 4:25 AM, Rohit Yadav <ro...@shapeblue.com> wrote:

> Hey,
> 
> On 13-Aug-2014, at 5:12 am, David Nalley <da...@gnsa.us> wrote:
> 
>> On Tue, Aug 12, 2014 at 6:04 PM, Rohit Yadav <ro...@shapeblue.com> wrote:
>>> I remember we agreed to not use the -forward branches, so can we get rid of them please?
>>> 
>>> I was reviewing someone’s patch and they had targeted that for 4.3.0-forward, though this branch is far behind than 4.3 branch; so does not make sense to merge their work on the forward branch. I’m going ahead with the main branches as I see they are already ahead of the forward branches.
>>> 
>> 
>> I think Sebastien was working on a 4.3.1 release. (and acting as its
>> release manager) Perhaps worth asking him.
> 
> I think no one is using the forward branches and all of them are behind the main release/support branches (you may check yourself), so let’s get rid of them?
> 
> Few questions around support branches such as 4.3, 4.2 etc:
> - Do we have any norm on backporting changes, or we do it already? If we don’t should we discuss doing something like this as many opensource project do it?
> - While backporting should it be only bugfixes or we can backport useful features?
> - To backport any bugfix or change, how do we commit them on old release/support branches such as 4.2, 4.3 etc.? Do we directly commit on them or ask present RMs?

I think we have agreed to no backport features (even though it can be doable in some cases). For bugs…I have asked for commits to 4.3 to be clean (single squash patched) with a clear commit message referring bug ID: CLOUDSTACK-XYZ. Ideally I would like the CHANGE file to be updated in that patch. But the current CHANGES file is already way out of sync so it needs lots of work.

> 
> Regards,
> Rohit Yadav
> Software Architect, ShapeBlue
> M. +41 779015219 | rohit.yadav@shapeblue.com
> Blog: bhaisaab.org | Twitter: @_bhaisaab
> 
> 
> 
> Find out more about ShapeBlue and our range of CloudStack related services
> 
> IaaS Cloud Design & Build<http://shapeblue.com/iaas-cloud-design-and-build//>
> CSForge – rapid IaaS deployment framework<http://shapeblue.com/csforge/>
> CloudStack Consulting<http://shapeblue.com/cloudstack-consultancy/>
> CloudStack Infrastructure Support<http://shapeblue.com/cloudstack-infrastructure-support/>
> CloudStack Bootcamp Training Courses<http://shapeblue.com/cloudstack-training/>
> 
> This email and any attachments to it may be confidential and are intended solely for the use of the individual to whom it is addressed. Any views or opinions expressed are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of Shape Blue Ltd or related companies. If you are not the intended recipient of this email, you must neither take any action based upon its contents, nor copy or show it to anyone. Please contact the sender if you believe you have received this email in error. Shape Blue Ltd is a company incorporated in England & Wales. ShapeBlue Services India LLP is a company incorporated in India and is operated under license from Shape Blue Ltd. Shape Blue Brasil Consultoria Ltda is a company incorporated in Brasil and is operated under license from Shape Blue Ltd. ShapeBlue SA Pty Ltd is a company registered by The Republic of South Africa and is traded under license from Shape Blue Ltd. ShapeBlue is a registered trademark.

Re: Should we remove all the -forward branches?

Posted by Rohit Yadav <ro...@shapeblue.com>.
Hey,

On 13-Aug-2014, at 5:12 am, David Nalley <da...@gnsa.us> wrote:

> On Tue, Aug 12, 2014 at 6:04 PM, Rohit Yadav <ro...@shapeblue.com> wrote:
>> I remember we agreed to not use the -forward branches, so can we get rid of them please?
>>
>> I was reviewing someone’s patch and they had targeted that for 4.3.0-forward, though this branch is far behind than 4.3 branch; so does not make sense to merge their work on the forward branch. I’m going ahead with the main branches as I see they are already ahead of the forward branches.
>>
>
> I think Sebastien was working on a 4.3.1 release. (and acting as its
> release manager) Perhaps worth asking him.

I think no one is using the forward branches and all of them are behind the main release/support branches (you may check yourself), so let’s get rid of them?

Few questions around support branches such as 4.3, 4.2 etc:
- Do we have any norm on backporting changes, or we do it already? If we don’t should we discuss doing something like this as many opensource project do it?
- While backporting should it be only bugfixes or we can backport useful features?
- To backport any bugfix or change, how do we commit them on old release/support branches such as 4.2, 4.3 etc.? Do we directly commit on them or ask present RMs?

Regards,
Rohit Yadav
Software Architect, ShapeBlue
M. +41 779015219 | rohit.yadav@shapeblue.com
Blog: bhaisaab.org | Twitter: @_bhaisaab



Find out more about ShapeBlue and our range of CloudStack related services

IaaS Cloud Design & Build<http://shapeblue.com/iaas-cloud-design-and-build//>
CSForge – rapid IaaS deployment framework<http://shapeblue.com/csforge/>
CloudStack Consulting<http://shapeblue.com/cloudstack-consultancy/>
CloudStack Infrastructure Support<http://shapeblue.com/cloudstack-infrastructure-support/>
CloudStack Bootcamp Training Courses<http://shapeblue.com/cloudstack-training/>

This email and any attachments to it may be confidential and are intended solely for the use of the individual to whom it is addressed. Any views or opinions expressed are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of Shape Blue Ltd or related companies. If you are not the intended recipient of this email, you must neither take any action based upon its contents, nor copy or show it to anyone. Please contact the sender if you believe you have received this email in error. Shape Blue Ltd is a company incorporated in England & Wales. ShapeBlue Services India LLP is a company incorporated in India and is operated under license from Shape Blue Ltd. Shape Blue Brasil Consultoria Ltda is a company incorporated in Brasil and is operated under license from Shape Blue Ltd. ShapeBlue SA Pty Ltd is a company registered by The Republic of South Africa and is traded under license from Shape Blue Ltd. ShapeBlue is a registered trademark.

Re: Should we remove all the -forward branches?

Posted by Sebastien Goasguen <ru...@gmail.com>.
On Aug 12, 2014, at 11:12 PM, David Nalley <da...@gnsa.us> wrote:

> On Tue, Aug 12, 2014 at 6:04 PM, Rohit Yadav <ro...@shapeblue.com> wrote:
>> I remember we agreed to not use the -forward branches, so can we get rid of them please?
>> 
>> I was reviewing someone’s patch and they had targeted that for 4.3.0-forward, though this branch is far behind than 4.3 branch; so does not make sense to merge their work on the forward branch. I’m going ahead with the main branches as I see they are already ahead of the forward branches.
>> 
> 
> I think Sebastien was working on a 4.3.1 release. (and acting as its
> release manager) Perhaps worth asking him.

I am not using 4.3-forward at all.

4.3 should be the latest in the 4.3.x series.

Re: Should we remove all the -forward branches?

Posted by David Nalley <da...@gnsa.us>.
On Tue, Aug 12, 2014 at 6:04 PM, Rohit Yadav <ro...@shapeblue.com> wrote:
> I remember we agreed to not use the -forward branches, so can we get rid of them please?
>
> I was reviewing someone’s patch and they had targeted that for 4.3.0-forward, though this branch is far behind than 4.3 branch; so does not make sense to merge their work on the forward branch. I’m going ahead with the main branches as I see they are already ahead of the forward branches.
>

I think Sebastien was working on a 4.3.1 release. (and acting as its
release manager) Perhaps worth asking him.