On Thu, Dec 07, 2017 at 10:28:36PM +0000, Liang Qi wrote:
> I really don’t think switch back to a monolithic repo is a good idea…
> 
> But if I understand atomic commits across submodules as successful 
> integrations in qt5, I think it has some meaning to me. Here are a few tasks 
> which I think perhaps related with this topic.
> 
> https://bugreports.qt.io/browse/QTBUG-19580
> https://bugreports.qt.io/browse/QTQAINFRA-824
> 

https://bugreports.qt.io/browse/QTQAINFRA-868 is much more pertinent.


> — Liang
> 
> > On 7 Dec 2017, at 18:17, Adam Treat <[email protected]> wrote:
> > 
> > Hi,
> > 
> > I think it is high time that we fix the underlying problem: supporting 
> > atomic commits across submodules.
> > 
> > Once this is done we should revert our CI to test changes against latest 
> > version of all modules. As for how this could be done:
> > 
> > * Adopt something like Google's repo tool: 
> > https://code.google.com/archive/p/git-repo/
> > * Stop using submodules and use a monolithic repo
> > * Git subtree
> > * Implement atomic commit across submodules not in Git, but in the 
> > gerrit/COIN layer so that COIN effectively locks integrations until commits 
> > that span submodules are finished
> > * Something else?
> > 
> > Cheers,
> > Adam
> > 
> > On 12/07/2017 11:22 AM, Liang Qi wrote:
> >> Since 
> >> http://lists.qt-project.org/pipermail/development/2016-October/027542.html 
> >> , Coin tests all changes against Qt5 instead of the latest version of all 
> >> modules.
> >> 
> >> The situation is sth like, some new APIs were added to qtbase in 5.10, and 
> >> other modules were adapted. But around beta or sometime(before release), 
> >> some refactoring work happened on those APIs. We adjusted them in qtbase, 
> >> and other modules. We have several steps to make sure those thing to be 
> >> approved in CI/COIN. But the order of things gets lost easily when merging 
> >> the changes up, for example to the dev branch.
> >> 
> >> Here are some suggestions to make those steps more clearer to the people 
> >> who maintain merge and integration.
> >> 
> >> The changes that are important to be merged up before other changes should 
> >> have a special tag, such as API_CHANGE in the commit message. Then the 
> >> script used to do the merges could stop and/or warn about commits with 
> >> this tag in the message, which would make the merge easier. We can also 
> >> apply this check into the submodule update script.
> >> 
> >> The situation is also valid for some private API changes(which were used 
> >> cross qt submodules).
> >> 
> >> About which labels are better to be used for this purpose, please give 
> >> your suggestion and votes. Thanks.
> >> 
> >> Best Regards,
> >> Liang
> >> 
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> Development mailing list
> >> [email protected]
> >> http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
> > 
> > _______________________________________________
> > Development mailing list
> > [email protected]
> > http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Development mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
_______________________________________________
Development mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development

Reply via email to