Doug Cutting wrote:
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.
+1. I agree: no review requirement for feature branches, and 1-5.
I would add to this (6) merging a feature branch to an official branch
goes through regular patch process, that is, a new jira is created with
the patch attachment, which now goes through the review process.
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.
Didn't understand this: external to what? What is internal repository?
--Konstantin
