Discussion:
Proposal to switch around branches
Dan Haywood
2018-09-05 06:32:25 UTC
Permalink
Hi folks,

At the moment the "master" branch holds the development that Andi is
leading for 2.0.0-M2. We also have "maint-1.16.2" - which is where any
development for a future 1.16.3 goes on.

However, our website documentation is published from "maint-1.16.2", but if
we get doc pull requests (via the "Edit this page") then they are raised
against "master. We recently had a few doc PRs which Andi applied, but it
occurs to me that these won't see "the light of day" unless I cherry pick
them back to "maint-1.16.2" branch and re-release.

Realistically we're going to be working on 2.0.0-Mn milestone releases for
a good few months yet, so I'd like to switch the branches back, ie:

master is renamed to dev-2.0.0 (say ... or maybe something easier to type,
eg "develop")
maint-1.16.2 is renamed back to master

I mentioned this to Andi offline, he's happy with the proposal, but
obviously this is a discussion to be had publicly on this dev@ mailing list.

Any concerns, please reply, otherwise will use lazy consensus.

Thx
Dan
--
DISCLAIMER: This e-mail is from Haywood Associates Ltd (Registered Number
3525455) and it and its attachments may be confidential and are intended
solely for the use of the individual to whom it is addressed. Any
unauthorised use or dissemination of this communication is strictly
prohibited. Any information provided to Haywood Associates Ltd shall be
retained and used in accordance with our Privacy Statement at
http://www.haywood-associates.co.uk/privacy. If you have received this
communication in error, please immediately notify the sender by return
e-mail message and delete all copies of the original communication.
Andi Huber
2018-09-05 06:42:10 UTC
Permalink
Thx Dan.
I'd like to propose a very short name for the main branch to use for version 2:

'v2'

Cheers, Andi!
Post by Dan Haywood
Hi folks,
At the moment the "master" branch holds the development that Andi is
leading for 2.0.0-M2. We also have "maint-1.16.2" - which is where any
development for a future 1.16.3 goes on.
However, our website documentation is published from "maint-1.16.2", but if
we get doc pull requests (via the "Edit this page") then they are raised
against "master. We recently had a few doc PRs which Andi applied, but it
occurs to me that these won't see "the light of day" unless I cherry pick
them back to "maint-1.16.2" branch and re-release.
Realistically we're going to be working on 2.0.0-Mn milestone releases for
master is renamed to dev-2.0.0 (say ... or maybe something easier to type,
eg "develop")
maint-1.16.2 is renamed back to master
I mentioned this to Andi offline, he's happy with the proposal, but
Any concerns, please reply, otherwise will use lazy consensus.
Thx
Dan
--
DISCLAIMER: This e-mail is from Haywood Associates Ltd (Registered Number
3525455) and it and its attachments may be confidential and are intended
solely for the use of the individual to whom it is addressed. Any
unauthorised use or dissemination of this communication is strictly
prohibited. Any information provided to Haywood Associates Ltd shall be
retained and used in accordance with our Privacy Statement at
http://www.haywood-associates.co.uk/privacy. If you have received this
communication in error, please immediately notify the sender by return
e-mail message and delete all copies of the original communication.
Dan Haywood
2018-09-06 21:08:23 UTC
Permalink
Happy to use 'v2' for 2.0.0 development.

Any other opinions? I'll look to switch after the weekend otherwise (ie
give it 72 hours)

Ta
Dan
Post by Andi Huber
Thx Dan.
'v2'
Cheers, Andi!
Post by Dan Haywood
Hi folks,
At the moment the "master" branch holds the development that Andi is
leading for 2.0.0-M2. We also have "maint-1.16.2" - which is where any
development for a future 1.16.3 goes on.
However, our website documentation is published from "maint-1.16.2", but
if
Post by Dan Haywood
we get doc pull requests (via the "Edit this page") then they are raised
against "master. We recently had a few doc PRs which Andi applied, but
it
Post by Dan Haywood
occurs to me that these won't see "the light of day" unless I cherry pick
them back to "maint-1.16.2" branch and re-release.
Realistically we're going to be working on 2.0.0-Mn milestone releases
for
Post by Dan Haywood
master is renamed to dev-2.0.0 (say ... or maybe something easier to
type,
Post by Dan Haywood
eg "develop")
maint-1.16.2 is renamed back to master
I mentioned this to Andi offline, he's happy with the proposal, but
list.
Post by Dan Haywood
Any concerns, please reply, otherwise will use lazy consensus.
Thx
Dan
--
DISCLAIMER: This e-mail is from Haywood Associates Ltd (Registered Number
3525455) and it and its attachments may be confidential and are intended
solely for the use of the individual to whom it is addressed. Any
unauthorised use or dissemination of this communication is strictly
prohibited. Any information provided to Haywood Associates Ltd shall be
retained and used in accordance with our Privacy Statement at
http://www.haywood-associates.co.uk/privacy. If you have received this
communication in error, please immediately notify the sender by return
e-mail message and delete all copies of the original communication.
--
DISCLAIMER: This e-mail is from Haywood Associates Ltd (Registered Number
3525455) and it and its attachments may be confidential and are intended
solely for the use of the individual to whom it is addressed. Any
unauthorised use or dissemination of this communication is strictly
prohibited. Any information provided to Haywood Associates Ltd shall be
retained and used in accordance with our Privacy Statement at
http://www.haywood-associates.co.uk/privacy. If you have received this
communication in error, please immediately notify the sender by return
e-mail message and delete all copies of the original communication.
Andi Huber
2018-09-08 16:38:24 UTC
Permalink
Comment inline ...
Post by Dan Haywood
Happy to use 'v2' for 2.0.0 development.
Any other opinions? I'll look to switch after the weekend otherwise (ie
give it 72 hours)
Ta
Dan
Post by Andi Huber
Thx Dan.
'v2'
Cheers, Andi!
Post by Dan Haywood
Hi folks,
At the moment the "master" branch holds the development that Andi is
leading for 2.0.0-M2. We also have "maint-1.16.2" - which is where any
development for a future 1.16.3 goes on.
However, our website documentation is published from "maint-1.16.2", but
if
Post by Dan Haywood
we get doc pull requests (via the "Edit this page") then they are raised
against "master. We recently had a few doc PRs which Andi applied, but
it
Post by Dan Haywood
occurs to me that these won't see "the light of day" unless I cherry pick
them back to "maint-1.16.2" branch and re-release.
Just out of curiosity, is this something that could be configured, in a way that PRs regarding the adoc files get filed against an arbitrary branch? Reason is, that I just merged a PR - kindly provided by Gabriel - against 'master', which was actual code! (and by the way: Hurray!!!)
Post by Dan Haywood
Post by Andi Huber
Post by Dan Haywood
Realistically we're going to be working on 2.0.0-Mn milestone releases
for
Post by Dan Haywood
master is renamed to dev-2.0.0 (say ... or maybe something easier to
type,
Post by Dan Haywood
eg "develop")
maint-1.16.2 is renamed back to master
I mentioned this to Andi offline, he's happy with the proposal, but
list.
Post by Dan Haywood
Any concerns, please reply, otherwise will use lazy consensus.
Thx
Dan
--
DISCLAIMER: This e-mail is from Haywood Associates Ltd (Registered Number
3525455) and it and its attachments may be confidential and are intended
solely for the use of the individual to whom it is addressed. Any
unauthorised use or dissemination of this communication is strictly
prohibited. Any information provided to Haywood Associates Ltd shall be
retained and used in accordance with our Privacy Statement at
http://www.haywood-associates.co.uk/privacy. If you have received this
communication in error, please immediately notify the sender by return
e-mail message and delete all copies of the original communication.
--
DISCLAIMER: This e-mail is from Haywood Associates Ltd (Registered Number
3525455) and it and its attachments may be confidential and are intended
solely for the use of the individual to whom it is addressed. Any
unauthorised use or dissemination of this communication is strictly
prohibited. Any information provided to Haywood Associates Ltd shall be
retained and used in accordance with our Privacy Statement at
http://www.haywood-associates.co.uk/privacy. If you have received this
communication in error, please immediately notify the sender by return
e-mail message and delete all copies of the original communication.
Dan Haywood
2018-09-13 15:11:43 UTC
Permalink
Hi folks,

Since there have been no objections to this, I'm going to switch around the
branches:

master becomes v2
maint-1.16.2 becomes master

Thx
Dan
Post by Andi Huber
Comment inline ...
Post by Dan Haywood
Happy to use 'v2' for 2.0.0 development.
Any other opinions? I'll look to switch after the weekend otherwise (ie
give it 72 hours)
Ta
Dan
Post by Andi Huber
Thx Dan.
'v2'
Cheers, Andi!
Post by Dan Haywood
Hi folks,
At the moment the "master" branch holds the development that Andi is
leading for 2.0.0-M2. We also have "maint-1.16.2" - which is where
any
Post by Dan Haywood
Post by Andi Huber
Post by Dan Haywood
development for a future 1.16.3 goes on.
However, our website documentation is published from "maint-1.16.2",
but
Post by Dan Haywood
Post by Andi Huber
if
Post by Dan Haywood
we get doc pull requests (via the "Edit this page") then they are
raised
Post by Dan Haywood
Post by Andi Huber
Post by Dan Haywood
against "master. We recently had a few doc PRs which Andi applied,
but
Post by Dan Haywood
Post by Andi Huber
it
Post by Dan Haywood
occurs to me that these won't see "the light of day" unless I cherry
pick
Post by Dan Haywood
Post by Andi Huber
Post by Dan Haywood
them back to "maint-1.16.2" branch and re-release.
Just out of curiosity, is this something that could be configured, in a
way that PRs regarding the adoc files get filed against an arbitrary
branch? Reason is, that I just merged a PR - kindly provided by Gabriel -
against 'master', which was actual code! (and by the way: Hurray!!!)
Post by Dan Haywood
Post by Andi Huber
Post by Dan Haywood
Realistically we're going to be working on 2.0.0-Mn milestone
releases
Post by Dan Haywood
Post by Andi Huber
for
Post by Dan Haywood
master is renamed to dev-2.0.0 (say ... or maybe something easier to
type,
Post by Dan Haywood
eg "develop")
maint-1.16.2 is renamed back to master
I mentioned this to Andi offline, he's happy with the proposal, but
mailing
Post by Dan Haywood
Post by Andi Huber
list.
Post by Dan Haywood
Any concerns, please reply, otherwise will use lazy consensus.
Thx
Dan
--
DISCLAIMER: This e-mail is from Haywood Associates Ltd (Registered
Number
Post by Dan Haywood
Post by Andi Huber
Post by Dan Haywood
3525455) and it and its attachments may be confidential and are
intended
Post by Dan Haywood
Post by Andi Huber
Post by Dan Haywood
solely for the use of the individual to whom it is addressed. Any
unauthorised use or dissemination of this communication is strictly
prohibited. Any information provided to Haywood Associates Ltd shall
be
Post by Dan Haywood
Post by Andi Huber
Post by Dan Haywood
retained and used in accordance with our Privacy Statement at
http://www.haywood-associates.co.uk/privacy. If you have received
this
Post by Dan Haywood
Post by Andi Huber
Post by Dan Haywood
communication in error, please immediately notify the sender by
return
Post by Dan Haywood
Post by Andi Huber
Post by Dan Haywood
e-mail message and delete all copies of the original communication.
--
DISCLAIMER: This e-mail is from Haywood Associates Ltd (Registered Number
3525455) and it and its attachments may be confidential and are intended
solely for the use of the individual to whom it is addressed. Any
unauthorised use or dissemination of this communication is strictly
prohibited. Any information provided to Haywood Associates Ltd shall be
retained and used in accordance with our Privacy Statement at
http://www.haywood-associates.co.uk/privacy. If you have received this
communication in error, please immediately notify the sender by return
e-mail message and delete all copies of the original communication.
Dan Haywood
2018-09-13 15:24:56 UTC
Permalink
OK done.

If you have a clone of the Apache Isis repo, then do the following:

git checkout -b temp
git fetch
git branch -f master origin/master # moves local master branch to
point to same commit as origin/master
git checkout master
git branch -D temp

There's also now a new 'v2' branch

Thanks
Dan
Post by Dan Haywood
Hi folks,
Since there have been no objections to this, I'm going to switch around
master becomes v2
maint-1.16.2 becomes master
Thx
Dan
Post by Andi Huber
Comment inline ...
Post by Dan Haywood
Happy to use 'v2' for 2.0.0 development.
Any other opinions? I'll look to switch after the weekend otherwise (ie
give it 72 hours)
Ta
Dan
Post by Andi Huber
Thx Dan.
'v2'
Cheers, Andi!
Post by Dan Haywood
Hi folks,
At the moment the "master" branch holds the development that Andi is
leading for 2.0.0-M2. We also have "maint-1.16.2" - which is where
any
Post by Dan Haywood
Post by Andi Huber
Post by Dan Haywood
development for a future 1.16.3 goes on.
However, our website documentation is published from
"maint-1.16.2", but
Post by Dan Haywood
Post by Andi Huber
if
Post by Dan Haywood
we get doc pull requests (via the "Edit this page") then they are
raised
Post by Dan Haywood
Post by Andi Huber
Post by Dan Haywood
against "master. We recently had a few doc PRs which Andi applied,
but
Post by Dan Haywood
Post by Andi Huber
it
Post by Dan Haywood
occurs to me that these won't see "the light of day" unless I
cherry pick
Post by Dan Haywood
Post by Andi Huber
Post by Dan Haywood
them back to "maint-1.16.2" branch and re-release.
Just out of curiosity, is this something that could be configured, in a
way that PRs regarding the adoc files get filed against an arbitrary
branch? Reason is, that I just merged a PR - kindly provided by Gabriel -
against 'master', which was actual code! (and by the way: Hurray!!!)
Post by Dan Haywood
Post by Andi Huber
Post by Dan Haywood
Realistically we're going to be working on 2.0.0-Mn milestone
releases
Post by Dan Haywood
Post by Andi Huber
for
Post by Dan Haywood
master is renamed to dev-2.0.0 (say ... or maybe something easier
to
Post by Dan Haywood
Post by Andi Huber
type,
Post by Dan Haywood
eg "develop")
maint-1.16.2 is renamed back to master
I mentioned this to Andi offline, he's happy with the proposal, but
mailing
Post by Dan Haywood
Post by Andi Huber
list.
Post by Dan Haywood
Any concerns, please reply, otherwise will use lazy consensus.
Thx
Dan
--
DISCLAIMER: This e-mail is from Haywood Associates Ltd (Registered
Number
Post by Dan Haywood
Post by Andi Huber
Post by Dan Haywood
3525455) and it and its attachments may be confidential and are
intended
Post by Dan Haywood
Post by Andi Huber
Post by Dan Haywood
solely for the use of the individual to whom it is addressed. Any
unauthorised use or dissemination of this communication is strictly
prohibited. Any information provided to Haywood Associates Ltd
shall be
Post by Dan Haywood
Post by Andi Huber
Post by Dan Haywood
retained and used in accordance with our Privacy Statement at
http://www.haywood-associates.co.uk/privacy. If you have received
this
Post by Dan Haywood
Post by Andi Huber
Post by Dan Haywood
communication in error, please immediately notify the sender by
return
Post by Dan Haywood
Post by Andi Huber
Post by Dan Haywood
e-mail message and delete all copies of the original communication.
--
DISCLAIMER: This e-mail is from Haywood Associates Ltd (Registered
Number
Post by Dan Haywood
3525455) and it and its attachments may be confidential and are intended
solely for the use of the individual to whom it is addressed. Any
unauthorised use or dissemination of this communication is strictly
prohibited. Any information provided to Haywood Associates Ltd shall be
retained and used in accordance with our Privacy Statement at
http://www.haywood-associates.co.uk/privacy. If you have received this
communication in error, please immediately notify the sender by return
e-mail message and delete all copies of the original communication.
Loading...