[CCC DEV] Branch question/confusion

[Martin Ellis]

What I was suggesting was.

All work is done in our own forks/branches.
We make a pull request and someone else in the team must review and pull it
into master when we are happy with it.  This way we get code review, and
these two people become responsible if something breaks.

Branching and tagging for release is separate.
We make a 1.6 branch off of master, this is not committed to directly, all
new work goes into master, we just cherry-pick bug fixes from master.
If we want a new feature, or master and 1.6 diverge so far that we can no
longer cherry-pick bug fixes we make a new branch from master and bump the
6.
Tags signify releases on a branch.  They should be done at stable points.
1.6.0 is the first stable point on the 1.6 branch.
We make new tags after pulling in fixes from master and when we think it is
stable.
We Tag often...?

does this sound sensible?



On Wed, Apr 24, 2013 at 12:37 PM, Matt Jadud <matt at jadud.com> wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> I'm unclear about the branch tagging question.
>
> Should we:
>
> 1. Tag at known good points, and
> 2. Do all development in trunk?
>
> or
>
> 1. Tag as we start work, and
> 2. Do development in a branch?
>
> With git, it seems like the natural workflow is:
>
> 1. Tag releases/feature points
> 2. Fork to explore/fix.
> 3. Request merges to bring them into trunk.
> 4. Branch for extended explorations
>
> I'm sure there's a workflow description out there for using git
> efficiently. I guess I'm just wondering /confused by the recent branching
> conversation---why would we do all our work in a branch, and then... merge
> back to trunk, as opposed to doing our work, and tagging at a point that we
> might want people to do a checkout?
>
> Or, did I confuse things horribly? I spent a good chunk of time with a
> screaming baby last night, so do please excuse the confusion.
>
> Cheers,
> Matt
>
> _______________________________________________
> developers mailing list
> developers at concurrency.cc
> http://lists.concurrency.cc/mailman/listinfo/developers
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.concurrency.cc/pipermail/developers/attachments/20130424/7f42d171/attachment.htm>