Thanks Larry and Phil,
Makes sense, we could simply rebase the feature branch periodically and
keep it in sync (as Phil pointed out - which would be what we do with the
fork currently).

Thanks for the inputs!


On Fri, Jan 21, 2022 at 1:32 PM larry mccay <[email protected]> wrote:

> +1 to the feature branch plan in general!
>
> I am -0 on double commits to the feature branch from master.
> It seems to me that syncing the feature branch is going to be more or less
> what is happening in the forks now but the other benefits to having a
> central feature branch here still add significant value.
>
> Having to do the sync is a pain but I don't think we should make it easy to
> keep a feature branch.
> Maybe that same argument can be used for justifying double commits though.
> :)
>
> Hadoop has feature branches as an optional part of their official process.
> We can consider the flow detailed in [1] and there may be other details
> that I will look for.
>
> 1. https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/HADOOP2/HowToCommit
>
> On Fri, Jan 21, 2022 at 12:12 PM Sandeep Moré <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
> > All,
> > I would like to get community input on the process of merging Webshell
> > feature to master.
> >
> > *Problem*:
> > 1. We would like to get this feature in by 2.0 but also would like to
> make
> > sure we get a proper reviews for this feature.
> > 2. Given the size of the feature, keeping it up to date with recent
> commits
> > (rebasing) is getting problematic.
> > 3. It appears that this feature will require collaboration from multiple
> > developers so having the feature in local repo is not ideal.
> >
> > *Proposal*:
> > Size and scope of this feature justifies creating a feature branch. The
> > idea is to create a feature branch in Apache Knox repo for this feature
> > (e,g, Webshell). Merge the existing PR fork (
> > https://github.com/apache/knox/pull/477) to this branch so multiple
> > developers can contribute to it with their own PRs (fixes/tasks). Doing
> > this will make sure we attribute code correctly to the developers who
> > contributed it and simplify the development process.
> >
> > Also, until this feature branch is active we would encourage (prefer,
> > really) developers to double commit to this feature branch and to master
> > branch. I understand this is not ideal but I am hoping we can bear the
> pain
> > for a short time until we release the feature.
> >
> > Any thoughts and ideas would be greatly welcomed.
> >
> > Best,
> > Sandeep
> >
>

Reply via email to