" Aside from the branch names, I would also like to point out that the release notes for PG 12 branches (both alpha and release) are not updated yet. The latest release notes show August 11th, which I think is a release note for PG11. I would like to suggest at least updating that info by the end of this discussion."
I need to clarify what you mean by release branches? Can you link the release notes that you are referring to? john On Thu, Dec 8, 2022 at 4:09 PM John Gemignani <[email protected]> wrote: > I was always told (*and maybe I was told incorrectly*) that once > something was pushed to the master repository, one should only really add > changes to it - not delete it. That it was bad practice to do otherwise. > > Other developers, like you and myself, generally clone the master > repository and base our work off of a local copy. I regularly sync my local > copy with the master to keep it up-to-date. If there are significant > changes (see below), that could easily cause confusion or make a mess with > rebasing. That mess can be very time consuming and frustrating to fix. > That's the "unhappy" part. > > Another part of my issue, and maybe it is a bit of an overreaction, with > renaming *a remote branch*, is that it involves pushing a new branch (a > copy of the old branch) to the remote and then *deleting *the old branch > on the remote. > > We had an issue, once, where a force push command was used on the remote > repository and it basically destroyed the master branch. Luckily, we had a > local copy that was current and were able to restore it. But, it was an > unpleasant experience; delete would likely be just as painful, if a mistake > were made. That is why I feel it is better to just not enter that territory. > > john > > On Mon, Dec 5, 2022 at 7:53 PM Joe Suh <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Thank you John for the brief history of the naming of branches. >> I see now there are some strict rules regarding these branch names. >> I'm not quite sure exactly why or how developers will be 'unhappy' with >> the >> change, >> but since you already discussed this matter, I guess the branch names are >> set in stone. >> >> Aside from the branch names, I would also like to point out that the >> release notes for PG 12 branches (both alpha and release) are not updated >> yet. >> The latest release notes show August 11th, which I think is a release note >> for PG11. >> I would like to suggest at least updating that info by the end of this >> discussion. >> >> >> >> >> * Joe Suh / 서준섭* >> >> * 과장 / 마케팅전략팀* >> >> *M* : 010-5364-5357 * P* : 070-5038-5732 >> *F * : 070-8677-2552 >> 서울특별시 강남구 테헤란로 516 정헌빌딩 4층 >> F4, 516, Teheran-ro, Gangnam-gu, Seoul, Republic of Korea >> >> >> 2022년 12월 2일 (금) 오전 4:11, John Gemignani <[email protected]>님이 >> 작성: >> >> > Thank you Joe for your input! >> > >> > Here are my general responses to your input in order of their >> appearance - >> > >> > Github's master branch really only supports AGE for *one *version of >> > PostgreSQL (PG). >> > >> > AGE started with PG 11, specifically PG 11.5, so the master branch is >> > technically AGE for PG 11.5. This really cannot change, at least not >> > easily. The only way would be if we had one version of AGE for all >> versions >> > of PG, *which is not trivial*. So, currently we are using branches off >> of >> > the master for these different PG versions of AGE. >> > >> > The names of the current branches cannot be renamed. Once a branch is >> made >> > public, it needs to stay the way it is - no renaming or deleting. This >> is >> > because others (developers) may reference it and changing it would cause >> > those developers to become "unhappy". So, we cannot rename a branch. We >> can >> > only create new branches, where appropriate, with the appropriate name. >> > Case in point, the alpha branch for PG 12. This needs to stay named as >> is. >> > We will, however, be creating a branch for it called PG 12 that will be >> > used going forward. >> > >> > The recent addition of AGE for PG 12 has caused us to revisit the >> naming of >> > our branches. So, we have looked at other repos and have discussed >> naming >> > conventions in previous [DISCUSS] threads and internal emails; you are >> > actually starting to see this with the release branch naming. Basically, >> > going forward, all main branches will be prefixed with *PG<version>* and >> > all of their corresponding release branches with >> > *release/PG<version>/<version>* The names of the previous PG 11 release >> > branches will, however, remain the same while the new release branches >> will >> > be *release/PG11/<version>* >> > >> > There will, of course, be some exceptions to these naming standards, for >> > example, experimental branches. >> > >> > Unfortunately, the only time that you will really get to see these >> changes >> > is when we either have a new version, a new release, or migrate >> something >> > from one to another. Which we will be doing with PG 12 shortly. >> > >> > Hope this was helpful. >> > >> > john >> > >> > On Wed, Nov 30, 2022 at 8:46 PM Joe Suh <[email protected]> wrote: >> > >> > > Hello everyone, >> > > >> > > I'm Joe (Github ID: jbiz805), one of the contributors in AGE. >> > > >> > > While I was working on the AGE readme for the past couple of months I >> > > couldn't help but notice questionable naming of branches in AGE repo. >> > > I am quite confused with the branch naming at the moment because the >> > latest >> > > version is PG 12(AGE_PG12.1.0_ALPHA) and yet the Master branch >> dedicates >> > to >> > > PG 11. >> > > Unlike other standalone software out there, I understand that there >> must >> > be >> > > branches for each Postgres version for AGE, like the upcoming 13, 14, >> and >> > > 15. >> > > But if PG 12 is now official (as updated in *release/PG12/1.1.0*) I >> think >> > > the topics below need to be discussed. >> > > Also, I think the whole branch names need updates because to an >> outsider >> > or >> > > non-developer pov, the branches seem quite unorganized. >> > > >> > > *1) Master Branch & Rename AGE_PG12.1.0_ALPHA* >> > > - since it's no longer Alpha, rename the alpha branch or remove the >> word >> > > alpha >> > > - also PG12 is the latest version for AGE, so shouldn't it be >> promoted to >> > > Master branch and PG 11 be made into a separate branch (for example, >> > > *AGE_PG11.1.0*)? >> > > - Just out of curiosity, does every GitHub repo require a master / >> main >> > > branch or can we just clearly specify branches for PG 11 and PG 12? >> > > >> > > *2) Update release notes for AGE_PG12.1.0_ALPHA (minor)* >> > > - currently showing Aug 11th release note, which belongs to PG 11 >> > > >> > > *3) Rename PG 11 release branches * >> > > - right now PG 12 release branch is named *release/PG12/1.1.0* >> > > *-* suggestion to rename PG 11 release branches, for example, >> > > *release/PG11/0.6.0*, *release/PG11/0.7.0*.... so on) >> > > >> > > Let's discuss the topics above and see what we can do about organizing >> > the >> > > branches. >> > > >> > > Best regards, >> > > Joe >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > * Joe Suh / 서준섭* >> > > >> > > * 과장 / 마케팅전략팀* >> > > >> > > *M* : 010-5364-5357 * P* : 070-5038-5732 >> > > *F * : 070-8677-2552 >> > > 서울특별시 강남구 테헤란로 516 정헌빌딩 4층 >> > > F4, 516, Teheran-ro, Gangnam-gu, Seoul, Republic of Korea >> > > >> > >> >
