El dimecres, 29 de juliol de 2020, a les 14:01:07 CEST, Bhushan Shah va escriure: > Hello everyone! > > At plasma, we are experimenting with new workflow regarding how bugfixes > are put on the stable branch [1]. > > # Previous workflow > > - Current workflow is that we commit to stable branch and then merge it > upwords until master branch > - i.e commit to Plasma/5.18 branch, merge 5.18 into 5.19 and then > master > > # Current workflow > > - Proposed workflow is to instead commit all changes in master, and > cherry-pick related changes in the stable branch as needed > - We had been using this workflow for about 1 month now and I'd say it > is working nicely for us. > > # Why? > > We occasionally hit several issues with previous workflow, > > - Merge conflicts when merging changes upwords
The conflicts are still going to be there, if your change has conflicts going up, it'll have conflicts going down. > - Changes which are valid only for stable branch needs to be reverted in > master branches. So you end-up with, stable-fix, revert of stable fix > and then different fix and overall weird history. I don't remember having one of teose, but i guess Plasma moves much faster than the repos I usually work on. > - Accidential merges from the master branch to stable branch which > needs to be force-resetted. I don't see how the proposed workflow help with developer clumsiness > - It's worth noting that Qt also recently changed to merge to dev, > cherry-pick backwards. Which is not nice, at the moment it means you need to do a fix for Qt 6 if you want it in Qt 5.15; i did one or two "uncompiled" commits to Qt6 because of that. This could potentially be a problem for us too, I don't want to compile Plasma master + KF5 master (that Plasma may depend on) just to fix something "trivial" in the stable branch I'm using (which i can compile without problems because my distro has all the packages needed for it) > - This also allows for workflows where we want to commit some bugfix in > the master branch for few days/weeks and if it works fine in general > testing then, cherry-pick it in stable branches. One improvement I think you didn't mention is: - "Non-core" people don't know what's the stable branch. I see that in Okular, most drive-by Merge Requests are against master, because that's the easy thing to do, for a "newbie" it's hard to figure out if something should go to the stable branch or not (is it a bugfix? a feature?), and if so, which is the stable branch if there's one, etc. > Proposal is to probably adapt this policy kde-wise if people feel that > advantages are worth it. +0 from my side Cheers, Albert > > Thanks > > [1] https://mail.kde.org/pipermail/plasma-devel/2020-June/117887.html > >
