[keycloak-dev] Some branches are gone?

[Bill Burke]

We maintain branches that our product is based on.  I'm not 
understanding why you can't create and maintain a branch yourself based 
on a release tag.  Git should be flexible enough to provide the source 
management you require.


On 9/9/16 11:35 AM, Thomas Darimont wrote:
> Hello Bill,
>
> Thanks for clarification.
>
> Using a tagged version as the base for a fork is not very practical, 
> since one now needs to investigate
> every commit in master (or between two tags) whether or not they are 
> compatible with the base version used for the fork - especially when a 
> security fix needs to be applied quickly. That was actually the main 
> idea behind the "let's base our fork on a recent maintenance branch" 
> approach... once a new maintenance branch is created we'd upgrade to 
> the latest maintenace branch version.
>
> I understand that it is very laborious to maintain a lot of 
> maintenance branches but I think retaining a few
> intermediate branches wouldn't hurt too much. Sometimes it's just 
> about doing a git cherry-pick on a commit
> or massging a commit a little bit to make it applicable to an earlier 
> version.
> This model is quite common for other projects e.g. the Spring Ecosystem.
>
> Retiring old branches branches (e.g. <= 1.9) is IMHO fine but as said 
> - the Keycloak team
> should IMHO really reconsider your maintenance policy.
>
> Why base a fork on an earlier version? Well sometimes one needs to 
> apply functionality or security patches
> or integrate new features that are tested but not yet released in the 
> form of an official release by the Keycloak project.
>
> I strive for being as close as possible as to the latest released 
> version because I assume that if security, stability or performance 
> problems were found in older versions then the probability that they 
> are corrected in a newer (potentially not yet released)
> version is quite high.
>
> As Juraci suggested, one could use github commit templates to ensure 
> that PR's are sent against the master branch.
> See:
> https://github.com/spring-projects/spring-boot/tree/master/.github 
> (raw format)
> https://github.com/blog/2111-issue-and-pull-request-templates
>
> Cheers,
> Thomas
>
> 2016-09-09 14:33 GMT+02:00 Bill Burke <bburke at redhat.com 
> <mailto:bburke at redhat.com>>:
>
>     We won't be reviewing or accepting PRs to anything but master and
>     maybe
>     1.9.x.  We just don't have the cycles to maintain older versions.  We
>     strive to maintain backward compatibility whenever possible.  WE
>     try to
>     make keycloak upgradable and will make fixes around this accordingly.
>     We have said this from day one. Releases are tagged, so if you need to
>     stay on a specific version for whatever reason, then you can
>     branch and
>     maintain the branch yourselves.  I don't recommend this though as you
>     will get no help from us and you'll be on your own.  If stability is
>     something you strive for, then I suggest you work off the community
>     version our product is based on: 1.9.x.
>
>
>     On 9/9/16 8:24 AM, Juraci Paixão Kröhling wrote:
>     > On 09/09/2016 02:17 PM, Stian Thorgersen wrote:
>     >> With a new minor release of Keycloak every 6 weeks that ends up
>     being a
>     >> lot of dead branches to keep around. Removing them makes it
>     clear they
>     >> are no longer maintained and stops people from sending PRs to
>     them (this
>     >> regularly happens).
>     > How about adding a CONTRIBUTING.md , telling people to send PRs
>     only to
>     > the branches you'd review/accept? If there's a CONTRIBUTING.md file,
>     > GitHub will add a link to it on the "Submit PR" page.
>     >
>     > - Juca.
>     > _______________________________________________
>     > keycloak-dev mailing list
>     > keycloak-dev at lists.jboss.org <mailto:keycloak-dev at lists.jboss.org>
>     > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/keycloak-dev
>     <https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/keycloak-dev>
>
>     _______________________________________________
>     keycloak-dev mailing list
>     keycloak-dev at lists.jboss.org <mailto:keycloak-dev at lists.jboss.org>
>     https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/keycloak-dev
>     <https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/keycloak-dev>
>
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/keycloak-dev/attachments/20160910/b157a8bf/attachment.html