Discussion:
[Pharo-dev] Preparing the 7.0 release (and 8.0 open), we will need to rename "development" branch to "dev-7.0"
Esteban Lorenzano
2018-11-22 10:40:27 UTC
Permalink
Hi list,

Well, subject says pretty much all.
We are planning to release Pharo 7.0 very soon now, and while preparing the release process, we came to the conclusion that we will need a branch for version to develop, and because of that we will need to rename what is not “development” to “dev-7.0”.
Then, it will be a “dev-8.0” and so on…

So, be prepared to submit your PRs to dev-7.0 instead development :)

Cheers,
Esteban
Julien
2018-11-22 10:51:39 UTC
Permalink
Hi,

Should we submit PR concerning non-stabilisation changes (like refactoring or new features) to another branch like dev-8.0 then?

Cheers,

Julien

---
Julien Delplanque
Doctorant à l’Université de Lille
http://juliendelplanque.be/phd.html
Equipe Rmod, Inria
Bâtiment B 40, Avenue Halley 59650 Villeneuve d'Ascq
Numéro de téléphone: +333 59 35 86 40
Post by Esteban Lorenzano
Hi list,
Well, subject says pretty much all.
We are planning to release Pharo 7.0 very soon now, and while preparing the release process, we came to the conclusion that we will need a branch for version to develop, and because of that we will need to rename what is not “development” to “dev-7.0”.
Then, it will be a “dev-8.0” and so on

So, be prepared to submit your PRs to dev-7.0 instead development :)
Cheers,
Esteban
Esteban Lorenzano
2018-11-22 11:00:59 UTC
Permalink
Once we open dev-8.0, yes :)

Esteban
Post by Julien
Hi,
Should we submit PR concerning non-stabilisation changes (like refactoring or new features) to another branch like dev-8.0 then?
Cheers,
Julien
---
Julien Delplanque
Doctorant à l’Université de Lille
http://juliendelplanque.be/phd.html <http://juliendelplanque.be/phd.html>
Equipe Rmod, Inria
Bâtiment B 40, Avenue Halley 59650 Villeneuve d'Ascq
Numéro de téléphone: +333 59 35 86 40
Post by Esteban Lorenzano
Hi list,
Well, subject says pretty much all.
We are planning to release Pharo 7.0 very soon now, and while preparing the release process, we came to the conclusion that we will need a branch for version to develop, and because of that we will need to rename what is not “development” to “dev-7.0”.
Then, it will be a “dev-8.0” and so on

So, be prepared to submit your PRs to dev-7.0 instead development :)
Cheers,
Esteban
Julien
2018-11-22 11:02:35 UTC
Permalink
Cool, thanks for all this work ! :-)

Julien

---
Julien Delplanque
Doctorant à l’Université de Lille
http://juliendelplanque.be/phd.html
Equipe Rmod, Inria
Bâtiment B 40, Avenue Halley 59650 Villeneuve d'Ascq
Numéro de téléphone: +333 59 35 86 40
Post by Esteban Lorenzano
Once we open dev-8.0, yes :)
Esteban
Post by Julien
Hi,
Should we submit PR concerning non-stabilisation changes (like refactoring or new features) to another branch like dev-8.0 then?
Cheers,
Julien
---
Julien Delplanque
Doctorant à l’Université de Lille
http://juliendelplanque.be/phd.html <http://juliendelplanque.be/phd.html>
Equipe Rmod, Inria
Bâtiment B 40, Avenue Halley 59650 Villeneuve d'Ascq
Numéro de téléphone: +333 59 35 86 40
Post by Esteban Lorenzano
Hi list,
Well, subject says pretty much all.
We are planning to release Pharo 7.0 very soon now, and while preparing the release process, we came to the conclusion that we will need a branch for version to develop, and because of that we will need to rename what is not “development” to “dev-7.0”.
Then, it will be a “dev-8.0” and so on

So, be prepared to submit your PRs to dev-7.0 instead development :)
Cheers,
Esteban
Christophe Demarey
2018-11-22 11:48:58 UTC
Permalink
Hi,

Why not following git flow?
Keep the development branch for dev and open a 70-release branch to prepare the release.
This way, there is no change for most people.

Christophe
Post by Esteban Lorenzano
Hi list,
Well, subject says pretty much all.
We are planning to release Pharo 7.0 very soon now, and while preparing the release process, we came to the conclusion that we will need a branch for version to develop, and because of that we will need to rename what is not “development” to “dev-7.0”.
Then, it will be a “dev-8.0” and so on…
So, be prepared to submit your PRs to dev-7.0 instead development :)
Cheers,
Esteban
Esteban Lorenzano
2018-11-22 12:21:23 UTC
Permalink
Post by Christophe Demarey
Hi,
Why not following git flow?
Keep the development branch for dev and open a 70-release branch to prepare the release.
This way, there is no change for most people.
Because our scripts are automated in branch and tag basis.
dev-7.0 will generate SNAPSHOT versions for files.pharo.org/70 <http://files.pharo.org/70> and tags (v7.0.0-rc1, for example) will generate a release.

We could have another flow, but this was what we decided last week and we will try it (maybe this is wrong and we will need to change it, but well
 we’ll see
 good part of having a process is that we can iterate on it :P)

Esteban
Post by Christophe Demarey
Christophe
Post by Esteban Lorenzano
Hi list,
Well, subject says pretty much all.
We are planning to release Pharo 7.0 very soon now, and while preparing the release process, we came to the conclusion that we will need a branch for version to develop, and because of that we will need to rename what is not “development” to “dev-7.0”.
Then, it will be a “dev-8.0” and so on

So, be prepared to submit your PRs to dev-7.0 instead development :)
Cheers,
Esteban
Esteban Lorenzano
2018-11-22 12:25:22 UTC
Permalink
Post by Esteban Lorenzano
Post by Christophe Demarey
Hi,
Why not following git flow?
Keep the development branch for dev and open a 70-release branch to prepare the release.
This way, there is no change for most people.
Because our scripts are automated in branch and tag basis.
dev-7.0 will generate SNAPSHOT versions for files.pharo.org/70 <http://files.pharo.org/70> and tags (v7.0.0-rc1, for example) will generate a release.
We could have another flow, but this was what we decided last week and we will try it (maybe this is wrong and we will need to change it, but well
 we’ll see
 good part of having a process is that we can iterate on it :P)
Btw, I’m not complete happy with this either: as it is previewed now, there will not be stable branch, and I feel this is incorrect. But again
 good thing is we can iterate, we’ll see if this works.

Esteban
Post by Esteban Lorenzano
Esteban
Post by Christophe Demarey
Christophe
Post by Esteban Lorenzano
Hi list,
Well, subject says pretty much all.
We are planning to release Pharo 7.0 very soon now, and while preparing the release process, we came to the conclusion that we will need a branch for version to develop, and because of that we will need to rename what is not “development” to “dev-7.0”.
Then, it will be a “dev-8.0” and so on

So, be prepared to submit your PRs to dev-7.0 instead development :)
Cheers,
Esteban
Christophe Demarey
2018-11-22 17:50:23 UTC
Permalink
Post by Esteban Lorenzano
Post by Esteban Lorenzano
Post by Christophe Demarey
Hi,
Why not following git flow?
Keep the development branch for dev and open a 70-release branch to prepare the release.
This way, there is no change for most people.
Because our scripts are automated in branch and tag basis.
dev-7.0 will generate SNAPSHOT versions for files.pharo.org/70 <http://files.pharo.org/70> and tags (v7.0.0-rc1, for example) will generate a release.
maybe not for now but we can update the scripts to check:
- master branch => release (only release tags there)
- development branch => snapshot
- release branch => snapshots or realease (rcx) if a tag is defined
- all other branches => do nothing
Post by Esteban Lorenzano
Post by Esteban Lorenzano
We could have another flow, but this was what we decided last week and we will try it (maybe this is wrong and we will need to change it, but well
 we’ll see
 good part of having a process is that we can iterate on it :P)
Btw, I’m not complete happy with this either: as it is previewed now, there will not be stable branch, and I feel this is incorrect. But again
 good thing is we can iterate, we’ll see if this works.
we could use the master branch for that => commits to master are only merges from release branches and hotfix branches.
Esteban Lorenzano
2018-11-28 11:25:19 UTC
Permalink
Ok, a new pass onto this, I decided that having just dev-Etc. branches and not having a clear stable one may lead to confusion.
After checking some projects on GitHub, seems that what they do is to name their branches just with the version, not with “dev” (like, for example "gtk-2.22”).

So, I will name the version based branchs “Pharo7.0”, “Pharo8.0” and so on.

(Without dash to keep coherence with the artefact naming)

Cheers!
Esteban
Post by Esteban Lorenzano
Post by Esteban Lorenzano
Post by Christophe Demarey
Hi,
Why not following git flow?
Keep the development branch for dev and open a 70-release branch to prepare the release.
This way, there is no change for most people.
Because our scripts are automated in branch and tag basis.
dev-7.0 will generate SNAPSHOT versions for files.pharo.org/70 <http://files.pharo.org/70> and tags (v7.0.0-rc1, for example) will generate a release.
We could have another flow, but this was what we decided last week and we will try it (maybe this is wrong and we will need to change it, but well
 we’ll see
 good part of having a process is that we can iterate on it :P)
Btw, I’m not complete happy with this either: as it is previewed now, there will not be stable branch, and I feel this is incorrect. But again
 good thing is we can iterate, we’ll see if this works.
Esteban
Post by Esteban Lorenzano
Esteban
Post by Christophe Demarey
Christophe
Post by Esteban Lorenzano
Hi list,
Well, subject says pretty much all.
We are planning to release Pharo 7.0 very soon now, and while preparing the release process, we came to the conclusion that we will need a branch for version to develop, and because of that we will need to rename what is not “development” to “dev-7.0”.
Then, it will be a “dev-8.0” and so on

So, be prepared to submit your PRs to dev-7.0 instead development :)
Cheers,
Esteban
Esteban Lorenzano
2018-11-28 11:25:56 UTC
Permalink
Ah, I forget to say that this change we enter in effect today :)
May the force be with us.

Esteban
Post by Esteban Lorenzano
Ok, a new pass onto this, I decided that having just dev-Etc. branches and not having a clear stable one may lead to confusion.
After checking some projects on GitHub, seems that what they do is to name their branches just with the version, not with “dev” (like, for example "gtk-2.22”).
So, I will name the version based branchs “Pharo7.0”, “Pharo8.0” and so on.
(Without dash to keep coherence with the artefact naming)
Cheers!
Esteban
Post by Esteban Lorenzano
Post by Esteban Lorenzano
Post by Christophe Demarey
Hi,
Why not following git flow?
Keep the development branch for dev and open a 70-release branch to prepare the release.
This way, there is no change for most people.
Because our scripts are automated in branch and tag basis.
dev-7.0 will generate SNAPSHOT versions for files.pharo.org/70 <http://files.pharo.org/70> and tags (v7.0.0-rc1, for example) will generate a release.
We could have another flow, but this was what we decided last week and we will try it (maybe this is wrong and we will need to change it, but well
 we’ll see
 good part of having a process is that we can iterate on it :P)
Btw, I’m not complete happy with this either: as it is previewed now, there will not be stable branch, and I feel this is incorrect. But again
 good thing is we can iterate, we’ll see if this works.
Esteban
Post by Esteban Lorenzano
Esteban
Post by Christophe Demarey
Christophe
Post by Esteban Lorenzano
Hi list,
Well, subject says pretty much all.
We are planning to release Pharo 7.0 very soon now, and while preparing the release process, we came to the conclusion that we will need a branch for version to develop, and because of that we will need to rename what is not “development” to “dev-7.0”.
Then, it will be a “dev-8.0” and so on

So, be prepared to submit your PRs to dev-7.0 instead development :)
Cheers,
Esteban
Esteban Lorenzano
2018-11-28 17:16:39 UTC
Permalink
Post by Esteban Lorenzano
Ah, I forget to say that this change we enter in effect today :)
Ok, maybe tomorrow since I needed to refresh my groovy knowledge ;)

Esteban
Post by Esteban Lorenzano
May the force be with us.
Esteban
Post by Esteban Lorenzano
Ok, a new pass onto this, I decided that having just dev-Etc. branches and not having a clear stable one may lead to confusion.
After checking some projects on GitHub, seems that what they do is to name their branches just with the version, not with “dev” (like, for example "gtk-2.22”).
So, I will name the version based branchs “Pharo7.0”, “Pharo8.0” and so on.
(Without dash to keep coherence with the artefact naming)
Cheers!
Esteban
Post by Esteban Lorenzano
Post by Esteban Lorenzano
Post by Christophe Demarey
Hi,
Why not following git flow?
Keep the development branch for dev and open a 70-release branch to prepare the release.
This way, there is no change for most people.
Because our scripts are automated in branch and tag basis.
dev-7.0 will generate SNAPSHOT versions for files.pharo.org/70 <http://files.pharo.org/70> and tags (v7.0.0-rc1, for example) will generate a release.
We could have another flow, but this was what we decided last week and we will try it (maybe this is wrong and we will need to change it, but well
 we’ll see
 good part of having a process is that we can iterate on it :P)
Btw, I’m not complete happy with this either: as it is previewed now, there will not be stable branch, and I feel this is incorrect. But again
 good thing is we can iterate, we’ll see if this works.
Esteban
Post by Esteban Lorenzano
Esteban
Post by Christophe Demarey
Christophe
Post by Esteban Lorenzano
Hi list,
Well, subject says pretty much all.
We are planning to release Pharo 7.0 very soon now, and while preparing the release process, we came to the conclusion that we will need a branch for version to develop, and because of that we will need to rename what is not “development” to “dev-7.0”.
Then, it will be a “dev-8.0” and so on

So, be prepared to submit your PRs to dev-7.0 instead development :)
Cheers,
Esteban
Stephan Eggermont
2018-11-28 16:46:50 UTC
Permalink
Post by Christophe Demarey
Why not following git flow?
Because git flow has branches that don’t add value?

Stephan
Loading...