Git repositories created and how to work with them

[Andreas Pakulat]

On 12.05.10 09:04:05, Vladimir Prus wrote:
> On Tuesday 04 May 2010 11:21:11 Andreas Pakulat wrote:
> > I've pushed all 5 repositories to gitorious.org/kdevelop (and the
> > project page also works now): kdevplatform, kdevelop, quanta, php,
> > php-docs. They're open for comitting, hence I'd like to talk a bit about
> > our workflow with that. (this is not set in stone of course)
> > 
> > I've created a 4.0 branch already from master, thats our stable branch
> > and should get all bugfix commits on it. We'll than have to make sure
> > that its merged once a week (or more often for important fixes) into
> > master so that master also gets the bugfixes. I don't want to be
> > responsible alone for that, so if anybody notices no merge on sunday
> > evening if there's been commits to 4.0 branch in the week, please just
> > do the merge.
> > 
> > The master branch is open for any kind of commits, but only
> > single-commit-change should be pushed to it directly. Everything else
> > should be done in a local branch and the branch then merged into master.
> > I'm thinking it makes sense to use --no-ff when doing the merge so that
> > even if a fast-forward is possible we'll get a merge-commit.
> 
> Was there a final agreement on workflow? Reading this thread, it looks
> like there's a number of different opinions.

The last mail was the one from Niko on May 4th (20:.. pm) which I agreed
with and nobody commented anything afterwards. Hence I'm considering
the silence as agreement for myself and thus the workflow is:

Bugfixes to be done in the stable branch directly or as small
topic-branch branched off the stable branch. If the fix is important
(like last nights commit to help scripty), merge directly to master and
push both. If it can wait a day or two the merging can be done later
together with other fixes so we don't end up with tons of merge-commits
in master.
 
> Also, it's not exactly clear to me how I am supposed to arrange my working
> copies. Should I just clone kdevelop repository locally, or else, make
> gitorious clone it, and then clone gitorious clone?

This is what I'm planning to do for myself: Have a local clone of the
original repo to do bugfixes in stable branch and smaller features
directly in master (single-commit-stuff basically). Anything bigger gets
a new branch branched off of master. If I then want to share this local
branch with others to work on it together or just have it more widely
tested then I'd add a remote for a clone of the repo on gitorious and
push the branch to that repo. Once its ready either merge it back into
master and push that to the original repo, or generate a merge-request
so that other can review the change depending on wether I know the code
well or not that I changed.

Andreas

-- 
Tomorrow will be cancelled due to lack of interest.