Sanjay Radia wrote:
On Feb 6, 2009, at 10:35 AM, Doug Cutting wrote:
Commits to a
feature branch should not require reviews, since these are equivalent to
updating a patch.
Agree, but it would be wise for the community to get their feedback to
the project team
earlier rather than later when the big patch to the trunk occurs.
Can Jiras be used to discuss a branch? Or would the project team discuss
this via another mechanism
(such as email).
Commits to a feature branch will send a message to the dev list, like
any other commit. And when folks commit to a feature branch, they
should reference the Jira issue id, as in any other commit, so that
folks browsing Jira can see the commits.
When someone starts a feature branch they should note it in the Jira
issue, so that folks know to browse the "Subversion Commits" tab to see
the patch history. I'd expect this to proceed as follows:
1. A comment proposing that a feature branch be added.
2. A comment by a different committer, endorsing the feature branch,
and no comments objecting.
3. A comment stating that the feature branch has been added, what
it's url is, and that folks should henceforth use the "Subversion
Commits" or "All" tab to track the issue.
4. Committers can commit directly to the feature branch, without
reviews. Since committers must have a CLA on file, Apache license is
assumed.
5. Non-committers can submit patches against the feature branch to
the issue in Jira. These would require the license signoff as usual.
Everything would still be in public, on the dev list, as now.
Note that we do *not* want feature branches in external repositories,
since commits there would not generate commit messages to the dev list
nor would they generate links in Jira, etc.
Doug
