[hibernate-dev] ORM 6 branch

[Steve Ebersole]

One thing that just occurred to me and Jan confirmed on Gitter...
Maintaining those tags will be impossible as long as we have to continue to
re-write history for 6.0 to integrate changes from master - merge is just
not an option there.  After each re-write the commits that those tags point
to are gone.


On Tue, Nov 27, 2018 at 9:02 AM Steve Ebersole <steve at hibernate.org> wrote:

> Then Chris and Andrea might as well push it to upstream as soon as they
> are done integrating the latest changes from master.
>
> On Tue, Nov 27, 2018 at 9:01 AM Yoann Rodiere <yoann at hibernate.org> wrote:
>
>> Yes, it seems we all agree then. Great :)
>>
>> About the "labelling" part, yes, that's what I meant.
>>
>> Yoann Rodière
>> Hibernate NoORM Team
>> yoann at hibernate.org
>>
>>
>> On Tue, 27 Nov 2018 at 15:52, Steve Ebersole <steve at hibernate.org> wrote:
>>
>>> We seem to be "arguing" the same thing.  As I said above, I am fine with
>>> moving it upstream.  Just making sure everyone has the same expectations
>>> (re-writing, eventual removal, etc) of that upstream branch because they
>>> are not typical of our upstream branches.
>>>
>>> I would not really call it "hidden away", but I agree that it should be
>>> easy to access.
>>>
>>> Not sure what you mean about your "labelling" point.  Label how?  Maybe
>>> you are referring to the "expectations"?  I agree that the name `wip/...`
>>> already implies these expectations.  Again, that is exactly why we borrowed
>>> that convention from Vlad in the first place.
>>>
>>>
>>> On Tue, Nov 27, 2018 at 8:27 AM Yoann Rodiere <yoann at hibernate.org>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> 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
>>>>>
>>>>