Home | About | Sematext search-lucene.com search-hadoop.com
 Search Hadoop and all its subprojects:

Switch to Threaded View
Accumulo >> mail # dev >> GIT


On Tue, Jun 4, 2013 at 10:49 PM, Josh Elser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

>
> On 06/04/2013 10:26 PM, Benson Margulies wrote:
>
>> 1.4.4 has been released. The first person finds some changes that should
>>> be
>>> placed into a 1.4.5 release. As such, a 1.4.5-SNAPSHOT branch would be
>>> created from the 1.4.4 tag.
>>>
>> What's the advantage of 1.4.5-SNAPSHOT as opposed to a branch named
>> 1.4.x? On other projects, there's an assumption of one branch per
>> maintained minor version, with point releases as tags along they way.
>> How is your more complex? scheme advantageous?
>>
> Much of this discussion is entirely based on the fact that my opinions
> were solicited while the majority of people tended not to agree with how I
> would prefer to manage branches.
>
> As such, I've stopped arguing my points as, and will attempt to be
> detached.  Having been part of transition a decent-sized "subversion" team
> to git, which typically tries to manage with 2+ concurrent releases, I've
> developed my own opinions on how to manage this. Most of it stems from lack
> of moderation on where changes should be made in such an environment and
> that history is easily mucked up and when changes are placed in
> inappropriate places. If it seems completely absurd to even have this
> discussion (I don't fault you in the slightest -- I'm 99% there myself),
> I'm actively working a write-up to track concrete decisions.
>

Can you give more detail about "history is easily mucked up"?  I am curious
what constitutes a mucked up history and what sequence of steps lead to
this?
>
> As far as a minor-release branch name, I really just don't care. It's a
> name. My opinion is to tie it to something specific and meaningful. I do
> not find 1.4.x nomenclature meaningful, so, as such, I proposed
> alternatives.
>
> Ultimately, I hope that those currently performing the most development
> should form their own opinion from the facts that have been presented when
> it comes time for a decision to be made.
>