Home | About | Sematext search-lucene.com search-hadoop.com
NEW: Monitor These Apps!
elasticsearch, apache solr, apache hbase, hadoop, redis, casssandra, amazon cloudwatch, mysql, memcached, apache kafka, apache zookeeper, apache storm, ubuntu, centOS, red hat, debian, puppet labs, java, senseiDB
 Search Hadoop and all its subprojects:

Switch to Threaded View
Accumulo >> mail # dev >> [git] Documentation and Plan of Action


Copy link to this message
-
Re: [git] Documentation and Plan of Action
I just asked this question and received a response in the #infra chat
room on freenode:

(05:32:08 PM) ctubbsii: Hi, infra. The Accumulo project is discussing
switching to git, and had a question. Does git allow deleting remote
branches? (which we'd want to do in our workflow, after merging to our
master branch). What other permissions/restrictions are set on Apache
git repos that we should be aware of?
(05:32:46 PM) KurtStam left the room (quit: Quit: KurtStam).
(05:33:22 PM) ke4qqq: ctubbsii yes
(05:33:59 PM) ke4qqq: ctubbsii: can't rewrite history, (e.g. no force
merges) aside from that not much that I can think of off the top of my
head
(05:34:19 PM) ctubbsii: ke4qqq: thank you very much!
(05:34:59 PM) ke4qqq: np

--
Christopher L Tubbs II
http://gravatar.com/ctubbsii
On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 4:21 PM, Christopher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 10:44 PM, Josh Elser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Alright, I think I covered all of the content that's needed.
>>
>> http://people.apache.org/~elserj/git/git.html
>>
>> Disclaimer, I actually got Christopher to say "it's kind of long...". Yes,
>> this was intended. I'd rather be (painfully) explicit front and lift out a
>> TL;DR version from the master document.
>
> I did read the whole thing. I would like to see a place for the
> scenarios I contributed, but other than that, I think it's a
> sufficient plan for transition.
>
>> _Please_ give feedback now as to what is still unclear about after reading
>> the document. I'd hate to have wasted all of this time writing this to just
>> change our minds again in the near future
>
> One thing mentioned is the release instructions (how to create/stage a
> release). I'm not sure things will work exactly the same as for svn,
> but I hope they'll be very close (it might require an extra 'git push'
> or something, after the normal steps expressed in assemble/build.sh).
> I'd have to do some more experimenting with git and the
> maven-release-plugin, after which I could write something up. I can do
> this after the transition, though, and after I'm sure myself how to do
> it smoothly. I don't think this should be a blocker, though.
>
>> Also, please look for text in _emphasis_ as these are things which I do not
>> believe were decided upon as a group. Copied here for your ease:
>>
>> 1. Need to ensure that deleting remote branches is not an issue. History is
>> still intact so this should not grind against ASF policy.
>
> IMO, this is probably the most important thing remaining to find out,
> since the described workflow that seems to have consensus assumes
> this.
>
>> 2. Do we have a nice write-up of the release policies?
>>
>> And, the last thing:
>>
>> Is everyone ok with the default branch when cloning the repository being
>> latest unstable branch (synonymous with what "trunk" is now)? If so, is
>> everyone ok with naming it `master`? This is what my vote is towards.
>
> +1, +1
>
>> Once we get these questions answered and the process reviewed, I believe
>> we're ready to move forward with the INFRA ticket.
>
> +1
>
> --
> Christopher L Tubbs II
> http://gravatar.com/ctubbsii
NEW: Monitor These Apps!
elasticsearch, apache solr, apache hbase, hadoop, redis, casssandra, amazon cloudwatch, mysql, memcached, apache kafka, apache zookeeper, apache storm, ubuntu, centOS, red hat, debian, puppet labs, java, senseiDB