Re: Managing openbmc with subtree

[Dave Cobbley <david.j.cobbley@linux.intel.com>]

I do agree that we can find a scriptable solution to this, however, I 
feel using the OWNERS plugin provides a much easier workflow for all 
developers, i.e. nothing changes from their perspective.

Additionally, we can still subtree on the back end after code is 
successfully merged into master.

Thanks,
-Dave

On 08/06/2018 11:47 AM, Brad Bishop wrote:
>> On Aug 1, 2018, at 5:53 PM, Dave Cobbley <david.j.cobbley@linux.intel.com> wrote:
>>
>> I posted an initial draft of what permissions could look like in the top level meta-data.
>>
>> https://gerrit.openbmc-project.xyz/#/c/openbmc/openbmc/+/11730/
> At first I was OK with this idea but instead of rushing to something
> I’d like to slow down for a sec and be sure we don’t like the other
> options.
>
> My issue with 11730 is that we wind up with different workflows for
> updating the different subtrees - for example updating meta-virtualization
> is different than updating meta-phosphor.
>
> If we go back to your original workflow where the developer pushes directly
> to the subtree repository instead of openbmc/openbmc, recall we were stuck
> on how to do it:
>
>>>> However at this point, I end up with two commits in the parent repo, one with the squashed changes, and a merge commit.
>>>> I don't know how to do this operation without ending up with a merge commit, do you have any advice here?
>>> To avoid the merge you can skip the subtree pull (which does a merge) and
>>> instead generate a patch:
>>>
>>> git cherry-pick —strategy=subtree -Xsubtree=path/to/subtree <squash-commit>
>
> Elaborating on my suggestion from before - here is a possible workflow.
>
> Consider a repository with two remotes:
>
> $ cat ~/.ssh/config
> Host openbmc.gerrit
>          Hostname gerrit.openbmc-project.xyz
>          Port 29418
>          User user
>          IdentityFile ~/.ssh/my-gerrit-key
>
> $ git remote -v
> meta-phosphor-gerrit    ssh://openbmc.gerrit/openbmc/meta-phosphor (fetch)
> meta-phosphor-gerrit    ssh://openbmc.gerrit/openbmc/meta-phosphor (push)
> openbmc-gerrit  ssh://openbmc.gerrit/openbmc/openbmc (fetch)
> openbmc-gerrit  ssh://openbmc.gerrit/openbmc/openbmc (push)
>
> You can make and commit changes as usual.  When it comes time to push for
> review:
>
> $ git checkout -b phosphor-master meta-phosphor-gerrit/master
> $ git cherry-pick —-strategy=subtree -Xsubtree=meta-phosphor <openbmc/openbmc-sha>
> $ git push meta-phosphor-gerrit HEAD:refs/for/master
>
> This gives us the same process for all subtrees, whether or not they are
> openbmc hosted subtrees.  It also does not require people hacking on a
> subtree to clone OpenBMC when it doesn’t make sense for them to do that,
> such as someone just using the Aspeed BSP layer.
>
> Granted it is a couple extra commands, but it seems like something that could
> be scripted pretty easily.  Thoughts?
>
> -brad
>
>> This will require additional people receive +2 permissions, but the OWNERS plugin will ensure that a patch cannot get merged unless it has +2 from the appropriate people.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> -Dave