@Robert, would you care to elaborate on the case for keeping a branch (by any
name) that this discussion thread overwhelmingly felt:
* "isn’t really in use for anything vital"
* "always a source of confusion"
* "don't see the need for it"
* "no good reason to keep it"
* "always a little unclear...what master was doing"
And if there is value in keeping it, why not pick a meaningful name like
"latest_release" or "stable"? If the goal is just to be a "symlink" to latest
release tag, why not just explain in the README how to check out the tag for
the release you want (which might not always be the latest release).
On 7/23/20, 7:53 PM, "Robert Houghton" <rhough...@vmware.com> wrote:
I would not delete the branch without a new branch 'main' in its place
On Jul 23, 2020 17:50, Owen Nichols <onich...@vmware.com> wrote:
Now that geode-examples' default branch has been changed to develop, and
nothing further has been added to this discussion in a while, would anyone like
to call for a vote to eliminate master branch from all geode projects?
I would suggest holding this vote under 'code modification' rules[1] since
we would be deleting code. Even though master should be substantially
equivalent to latest release tag (currently rel/v1.12.0), git diff shows a few
small differences.
[1] a timeframe of at least 72 hours and a single -1 can veto, see
https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.apache.org%2Ffoundation%2Fvoting.html&data=02%7C01%7Conichols%40vmware.com%7Ce8cb371011d646d6732a08d82f7cacce%7Cb39138ca3cee4b4aa4d6cd83d9dd62f0%7C0%7C0%7C637311559822135664&sdata=BslahNdd6RbgcY9JyedooteRynOME1EYKfSB4z2MrS4%3D&reserved=0
On 7/7/20, 6:33 PM, "Owen Nichols" <onich...@vmware.com> wrote:
Since the branch proposed for deletion is the default branch in
geode-examples, you will need to file an ASF INFRA ticket to change that
default. This is a great discussion thread, but ASF will require a [VOTE]
thread to be cited.
I am concerned about keeping it easy for someone who has just cloned
geode to identify the most stable branch for their purpose. Before, they could
always be assured `git checkout master` would give the flagship release. Now,
new users will be immediately forced into some daunting detective work to sift
through hundreds of haphazard tags and branches (a task even veteran committers
frequently fail). I would strongly encourage an aggressive cleanup of
unhelpful branches and tags, as Jacob proposed last month, before getting rid
of the latest_release concept.
On 7/7/20, 8:24 AM, "Blake Bender" <bbl...@vmware.com> wrote:
Just to follow up on this: I've filed GEODE-8335
(https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fissues.apache.org%2Fjira%2Fbrowse%2FGEODE-8335&data=02%7C01%7Conichols%40vmware.com%7Ce8cb371011d646d6732a08d82f7cacce%7Cb39138ca3cee4b4aa4d6cd83d9dd62f0%7C0%7C0%7C637311559822145657&sdata=q%2BIxOGYvk141Rkw72WPZGhrjtNC5%2B1khQwPIx00FNUM%3D&reserved=0)
to track, respectfully (cowardly __ ) deferring to individuals who regularly
contribute to the various Geode repos to handle it as they see fit. I'll take
care of the several Geode Native associated repos.
Thanks,
Blake
On 6/26/20, 12:21 PM, "Dave Barnes" <dbar...@apache.org> wrote:
+1 if we can override git’s ‘master’ default and establish
‘develop’ in its place. Otherwise renaming to ‘main’ would solve the problem
with the negative connotations.
NB: Mark, I think the 3-vote convention is just for back-ports
to the release-branch. I don’t think of it as applying to a general discussion
like this one.
> On Jun 26, 2020, at 9:42 AM, Anthony Baker
<bak...@vmware.com> wrote:
>
> By just do it, I assume you mean:
>
> - Contact delete master where not needed
> - Rename master to main when needed
> - Contact INFRA to change the default branch
> - Update README and CI jobs as needed
>
> Across *all* geode repos.
>
>
> Anthony
>
>
>> On Jun 26, 2020, at 9:38 AM, Mark Hanson
<mhan...@pivotal.io> wrote:
>>
>> +1 to delete. No good reason to keep it that I know of. I
think I am the third +1 with no -1s so just do it.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Mark
>>
>>> On Jun 26, 2020, at 9:13 AM, Alexander Murmann
<amurm...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>
>>> +1 to deleting. Given we tag everything properly on the
other branches, I
>>> don't see the need for it either.
>>>
>>> On Fri, Jun 26, 2020 at 9:03 AM Alberto Bustamante Reyes
>>> <alberto.bustamante.re...@est.tech> wrote:
>>>
>>>> +1 for deleting master branch. An also for updating the
wiki page about
>>>> branching that Alberto pointed out.
>>>> ________________________________
>>>> De: Bruce Schuchardt <bru...@vmware.com>
>>>> Enviado: viernes, 26 de junio de 2020 17:37
>>>> Para: dev@geode.apache.org <dev@geode.apache.org>
>>>> Asunto: Re: Fate of master branch
>>>>
>>>> Let's just delete it. I need to do that in my own repos
as well.
>>>>
>>>> On 6/26/20, 8:05 AM, "Blake Bender" <bbl...@vmware.com>
wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Apologies if this has been addressed already and I missed
it. In
>>>> keeping with other OSS projects, I believe it’s time we
did something about
>>>> removing the insensitive term master from Geode
repositories.
>>>>
>>>> One choice a lot of projects appear to be going with is a
simple
>>>> rename from master • main. In our own case, however,
master isn’t really
>>>> in use for anything vital. We track releases with a tag
and a branch to
>>>> backport fixes to, and the develop branch is the “source
of truth”
>>>> latest-and-greatest version of the code. We could thus
simply delete
>>>> master with no loss I’m aware of. Any opinions?
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>>
>>>> Blake
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>
