master branch in git

master branch in git

[John Leach]

Hi, 

what's the master branch used for in the git repository? It's currently
at "v0.24". It's not had 0.24.1 or 0.24.2 merged into it so it doesn't
seem to be stable.

There is a stable branch but it's not been updated since September.

John.

Re: master branch in git

[Gregory Farnum]

You're talking about the userspace Ceph repository?
I wasn't aware there was a master or stable branch (heh). I thought
Sage had just recently cleaned up the old branches, but we may still
have a bit of a mess as we adjusted to a larger team size and more
formal releases. You're generally going to want one of testing,
unstable, rc.

Unstable is the branch we do dev work on. It has the newest shiny
stuff and is far more likely to be broken than the other branches, to
get commits erased, etc.
Testing is the previous release plus bugfixes, and will eventually
become the next point release (eg, v.24.3).
rc is maintained when we're approaching a major release (eg, v.25) and
contains the features we expect to go into that branch. This branch
comes off of unstable but once it branches it's a fairly stable
branch.

On Wed, Jan 26, 2011 at 1:16 PM, John Leach <john@brightbox.co.uk> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> what's the master branch used for in the git repository? It's currently
> at "v0.24". It's not had 0.24.1 or 0.24.2 merged into it so it doesn't
> seem to be stable.
>
> There is a stable branch but it's not been updated since September.
>
> John.
>
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe ceph-devel" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
>
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe ceph-devel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Re: master branch in git

[Tommi Virtanen]

On Wed, Jan 26, 2011 at 09:16:07PM +0000, John Leach wrote:
> what's the master branch used for in the git repository? It's currently
> at "v0.24". It's not had 0.24.1 or 0.24.2 merged into it so it doesn't
> seem to be stable.
> 
> There is a stable branch but it's not been updated since September.

You know, that confused me too when I was starting to look at ceph.

The branches that are actively used are "unstable" and "testing".  I
guess "stable" will get some life, well, once we consider Ceph stable
;)

To clear up this issue, I'd suggest we either:

1. start using "master" for what is now called "unstable" (which is
   the typical git usage elsewhere)

2. remove the branch "master", and update
   ceph.newdream.net:/git/ceph.git/HEAD to say "ref: refs/heads/unstable"

I personally vote for #1, unless somebody can come up with a
convincing historical argument..

-- 
:(){ :|:&};:

Re: master branch in git

[John Leach]

On Wed, 2011-01-26 at 13:22 -0800, Gregory Farnum wrote:
> You're talking about the userspace Ceph repository?
> I wasn't aware there was a master or stable branch (heh). I thought
> Sage had just recently cleaned up the old branches, but we may still
> have a bit of a mess as we adjusted to a larger team size and more
> formal releases. You're generally going to want one of testing,
> unstable, rc.
> 
> Unstable is the branch we do dev work on. It has the newest shiny
> stuff and is far more likely to be broken than the other branches, to
> get commits erased, etc.
> Testing is the previous release plus bugfixes, and will eventually
> become the next point release (eg, v.24.3).
> rc is maintained when we're approaching a major release (eg, v.25) and
> contains the features we expect to go into that branch. This branch
> comes off of unstable but once it branches it's a fairly stable
> branch.

thanks for the clarification Greg.

It's a bit weird seeing the master branch like that. It just looks a bit
abandoned, and it's the branch most people (and git clients) go to
first.

Example: http://ceph.newdream.net/git/?p=ceph.git;a=summary  :)

Not sure what to do about it though.

weird seeing the "stable" branch be 3 months old too.

http://ceph.newdream.net/git/?p=ceph.git;a=shortlog;h=refs/heads/stable

I think it'd be nice to see each tagged release get merged to stable,
and perhaps unstable commits on master? Not sure.

sorry to complain, just trying to help :)

John.

> 
> On Wed, Jan 26, 2011 at 1:16 PM, John Leach <john@brightbox.co.uk> wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > what's the master branch used for in the git repository? It's currently
> > at "v0.24". It's not had 0.24.1 or 0.24.2 merged into it so it doesn't
> > seem to be stable.
> >
> > There is a stable branch but it's not been updated since September.
> >
> > John.
> >
> > --
> > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe ceph-devel" in
> > the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> > More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> >
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe ceph-devel" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Re: master branch in git

[Gregory Farnum]

On Wed, Jan 26, 2011 at 1:51 PM, John Leach <john@brightbox.co.uk> wrote:
> I think it'd be nice to see each tagged release get merged to stable,
> and perhaps unstable commits on master? Not sure.
>
> sorry to complain, just trying to help :)
>
> John.
Oh, no worries. We'll talk about this internally tomorrow. :)
-Greg

Re: master branch in git

[Sage Weil]

Yeah.  Currently:

 master - last release (but I forgot to update it)
 unstable - unstable
 testing - bug fixes to last release, will become next stable release
 rc - will become next major release

I agree that's not optimal.  I think moving unstable to work to master 
makes sense.

How about something like:

 master - unstable (and get rid of 'unstable' branch)
 testing or stable - bug fixes to last release.
 rc or next - what will be the next major release

Does anyone see value in having a branch that has the last release?  They 
can see that with the git tags.

sage

Re: master branch in git

[Gregory Farnum]

On Wed, Jan 26, 2011 at 2:01 PM, Sage Weil <sage@newdream.net> wrote:
> How about something like:
>
>  master - unstable (and get rid of 'unstable' branch)
>  testing or stable - bug fixes to last release.
>  rc or next - what will be the next major release

It seems a little weird/worrisome to me that the default branch would
be one that sees as much churn as unstable gets. Maybe that's not
actually an issue for people, but I'd naively rather see master be
what rc is right now than what unstable is right now.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe ceph-devel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Re: master branch in git

[Jim Schutt]

Hi,

On Wed, 2011-01-26 at 15:01 -0700, Sage Weil wrote:
> Yeah.  Currently:
> 
>  master - last release (but I forgot to update it)
>  unstable - unstable
>  testing - bug fixes to last release, will become next stable release
>  rc - will become next major release
> 
> I agree that's not optimal.  I think moving unstable to work to master 
> makes sense.
> 
> How about something like:
> 
>  master - unstable (and get rid of 'unstable' branch)
>  testing or stable - bug fixes to last release.
>  rc or next - what will be the next major release
> 

FWIW, master/stable/next makes sense to me.

> Does anyone see value in having a branch that has the last release?  They 
> can see that with the git tags.

Also FWIW, I think tags should be enough for releases.

-- Jim

> 
> sage
> 
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe ceph-devel" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> 

Re: master branch in git

[Colin McCabe]

On Wed, Jan 26, 2011 at 2:05 PM, Gregory Farnum
<gregory.farnum@dreamhost.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 26, 2011 at 2:01 PM, Sage Weil <sage@newdream.net> wrote:
>> How about something like:
>>
>>  master - unstable (and get rid of 'unstable' branch)
>>  testing or stable - bug fixes to last release.
>>  rc or next - what will be the next major release
>
> It seems a little weird/worrisome to me that the default branch would
> be one that sees as much churn as unstable gets. Maybe that's not
> actually an issue for people, but I'd naively rather see master be
> what rc is right now than what unstable is right now.

The mindset users have is something like this:
Do I want something stable? If so, then download the source code
tarball for the previous release (or RPM, or DPKG, or whatever.) If
not, then get the code directly out of the source code repository.

Theoretically, you could get the stable version out of the source code
repository. But when was the last time you did that (for a project you
weren't developing)? That's why the tradition is for master / SVN HEAD
to be unstable.

cheers,
Colin
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe ceph-devel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html