From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: From: "Kevin Hilman" Subject: Re: staging projects in github In-Reply-To: References: <7himwxvr6m.fsf@baylibre.com> <20190305170426.4kuzc4fq7fmvoeud@xps.therub.org> <15891FEF165BAE41.4955@groups.io> Date: Tue, 12 Mar 2019 10:47:16 -0700 Message-ID: <7hr2bct26z.fsf@baylibre.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain List-ID: To: Guillaume Tucker , kernelci@groups.io, Guillaume Tucker Cc: Dan Rue , Matt Hart Guillaume Tucker writes: > On Tue, Mar 5, 2019 at 5:24 PM Guillaume Tucker via Groups.Io > wrote: > >> >> On Tue, Mar 5, 2019 at 5:04 PM Dan Rue wrote: >> >>> On Tue, Mar 05, 2019 at 04:48:52PM +0000, Matt Hart wrote: >>> > On Tue, 5 Mar 2019 at 05:14, Kevin Hilman wrote: >>> > > >>> > > Can we consolidate the various "-staging" project in github with the >>> > > originals? I've never fully understood why we created separate github >>> > > projects, when we should just be using a staging branch within the >>> main >>> > > project. >> >> [...] > >> I'm not sure if I'm considering all of the use-cases, but in the past >>> I've much preferred having staging == "master" and then tagging for >>> production releases. This does make it difficult (but not impossible) to >>> have things in staging that are not promoted to production. >>> >> >> What would make most sense imo would be to have the master branch >> receiving the PRs (like Dan wrote) and a live "prod" branch used >> by Jenkins. >> > > So how about having one last staging -> prod sync this week using > the kernelci-core-staging project, and then switch to using > kernelci-core only starting from next week? Sounds good to me. Kevin