[hibernate-dev] ORM 6 branch

Yoann Rodiere yoann at hibernate.org
Tue Nov 27 09:27:05 EST 2018

I may be wrong, but I understood your message as an argument that moving
6.0 to upstream would be bad, because having a topic branch upstream is not
a good practice.

Topic branches are typically short-lived and focus on a specific feature or
bugfix. I agree topic branches in upstream would be a mess.

But let's be honest: wip/6.0 has been around for years, includes tons of
different improvements, and has impacts in many places of the codebase
(nearly 10,000 files from what I can see) . It hardly qualifies as a topic
branch anymore, and even if we extend the definition to include such a
massive changeset, we can probably agree it's not your typical "change a
dozen files and we're done" topic branch. Wouldn't an atypical branch call
for an atypical workflow?

Besides... and perhaps more importantly, it's the branch everyone seems to
be working on these days. Once 6.0.0.Alpha1 has been released, it would
seem odd for all that work to be hidden away in someone's fork, be it the
project leader's. If the branch is regularly rewritten, so be it: at least
it should be easily found.

Again, no problem with labelling it differently to make clear that we offer
no guarantee of a stable history on that branch. To me, the name "wip/6.0"
makes this very clear already.

Yoann Rodière
Hibernate NoORM Team
yoann at hibernate.org

On Tue, 27 Nov 2018 at 14:42, Steve Ebersole <steve at hibernate.org> wrote:

> On Tue, Nov 27, 2018 at 7:22 AM Davide D'Alto <davide at hibernate.org>
> wrote:
> > +1 for the creation of the branch upstream and everything Yoann said.
> >
> > One curiosity,  once there is an alpha, why would you delete the whole
> > branch?
> > Couldn't you change everything on the existing branch without deleting
> it?
> > It's unusual to rewrite the history of upstream branches but we have
> > done it before.
> >
> Well first, I never said it would be deleted after the Alpha.  I said it
> would be deleted *at some point*, meaning at some point after 6 is moved to
> master.
> Also, IMO, topic branches upstream are generally speaking a very bad idea.
> So this is something we hardly ever do - maybe y'all do on other projects,
> dunno.  But either way, it is very common for a topic branch to go away
> eventually.
> As far as re-writing history, sure it is unusual but we are already in the
> realm of unusual merely by having a topic branch upstream
> _______________________________________________
> hibernate-dev mailing list
> hibernate-dev at lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hibernate-dev

More information about the hibernate-dev mailing list