The release notes in any branch named release/<something>, are basically frozen to when that release branch was created. Think of the releases as snapshots, they won't change, once created.
The alpha PG12 branch that release/PG12/1.1.0 is based off of is the release/1.1.0 branch (PG 11). That is why the release notes are the same. FYI, to avoid confusion in the future, the next release for PG11 will be release/PG11/<version number> Basically, release/PG<version>/<age version> Hope this is helpful. john On Thu, Dec 8, 2022 at 4:27 PM Joe Suh <[email protected]> wrote: > "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." > > I'm not a developer, but I guess I get that part now. > Thanks for clearing that up. > > The release branch I was talking about was > https://github.com/apache/age/tree/release/PG12/1.1.0 > Also refer to https://github.com/apache/age/tree/AGE_PG12.1.0_ALPHA (alpha > branch) > > These two branches have Aug 11th release notes as 'Latest'. > I believe this is a release note for PG11. > Although I see no differences between the release notes for Aug 11th and > Oct 26th, > Oct 26th states it's a release note for PG12, hence why I suggested the two > branches be updated. > > 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 > > > 2022년 12월 9일 (금) 오전 9:12, John Gemignani <[email protected]>님이 > 작성: > > > " 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 > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >
