+1 On 01/13/2016 11:51 AM, Fabian Hueske wrote: > @Stephan: You mean all tags should be protected, not only those under rel? > > 2016-01-13 11:43 GMT+01:00 Till Rohrmann <trohrm...@apache.org>: > >> +1 for protecting the master branch. >> >> On Wed, Jan 13, 2016 at 11:42 AM, Li, Chengxiang <chengxiang...@intel.com> >> wrote: >> >>> +1 on the original style. >>> Master branch disable force pushing in case of misusing and feature >> branch >>> enable force pushing for flexible developing. >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: Gyula Fóra [mailto:gyf...@apache.org] >>> Sent: Wednesday, January 13, 2016 6:36 PM >>> To: dev@flink.apache.org >>> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Git force pushing and deletion of branchs >>> >>> +1 for protecting the master branch. >>> >>> I also don't see any reason why anyone should force push there >>> >>> Gyula >>> >>> Fabian Hueske <fhue...@gmail.com> ezt írta (időpont: 2016. jan. 13., >> Sze, >>> 11:07): >>> >>>> Hi everybody, >>>> >>>> Lately, ASF Infra has changed the write permissions of all Git >>>> repositories twice. >>>> >>>> Originally, it was not possible to force into the master branch. >>>> A few weeks ago, infra disabled also force pushing into other branches. >>>> >>>> Now, this has changed again after the issue was discussed with the ASF >>>> board. >>>> The current situation is the following: >>>> - force pushing is allowed on all branched, including master >>>> - branches and tags can be deleted (not sure if this applies as well >>>> for the master branch) >>>> - "the 'protected' portions of git to primarily focus on refs/tags/rel >>>> - thus any tags under rel, will have their entire commit history." >>>> >>>> I am not 100% sure which exact parts of the repository are protected >>>> now as I am not very much into the details of Git. >>>> However, I believe we need to create new tags under rel for our >>>> previous releases to protect them. >>>> >>>> In addition, I would like to propose to ask Infra to add protection >>>> for the master branch. I can only recall very few situations where >>>> changes had to be reverted. I am much more in favor of a reverting >>>> commit now and then compared to a branch that can be arbitrarily >> changed. >>>> >>>> What do you think about this? >>>> >>>> Best, Fabian >>>> >>> >> >
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
