Re: Fate of master branch
@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" wrote: I would not delete the branch without a new branch 'main' in its place On Jul 23, 2020 17:50, Owen Nichols 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" 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" 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" 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 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 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 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 >>> wrote: >>> +1 for deleting master branch. An also for updating the wiki page about >
Re: Fate of master branch
We are presumably following the `git-flow` release process, of loosely. That process specifies that there is a branch which is the latest main (not supporting) release. If you want to call is `release` then fine. A rose by any other name, and all that. But having that reference is useful for the working model that we purport to follow. From: Owen Nichols Sent: Friday, July 24, 2020 1:45 AM To: dev@geode.apache.org Subject: Re: Fate of master branch @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" wrote: I would not delete the branch without a new branch 'main' in its place On Jul 23, 2020 17:50, Owen Nichols 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%7Crhoughton%40vmware.com%7C777db553b8ab4b233dcc08d82fadee8a%7Cb39138ca3cee4b4aa4d6cd83d9dd62f0%7C0%7C0%7C637311771371808600&sdata=c60eG80iwUxt1YMX6mQIxu%2BsNaOz4oLCexOLFERQ8IQ%3D&reserved=0 On 7/7/20, 6:33 PM, "Owen Nichols" 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" 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%7Crhoughton%40vmware.com%7C777db553b8ab4b233dcc08d82fadee8a%7Cb39138ca3cee4b4aa4d6cd83d9dd62f0%7C0%7C0%7C637311771371818600&sdata=lggG4kZu37SgNdlWaMKOTB4ulTtpbaDqrueUItiHK1E%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" 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 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 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 >>
