I wouldn't go so far as to say "problematic". However, I sure don't like
the maven plugins. I have had more success implementing the steps manually.
I'd be the first to admit this may be personal preference. I haven't used
the git-flow subcommands.

On Fri, Nov 28, 2014 at 9:43 PM, Joe Witt <[email protected]> wrote:

> Sergio - thanks for the refs.  Very helpful.
>
> Adam
>
> From a pure developer perspective I think what you're saying there sounds
> ideal.  Again as with versioning it comes down to discipline.  Being
> disciplined of course is aided by convenience.  I am curious of the
> mechanics of doing what you propose.  Tony had made a comment about the
> tooling around a Gitflow construct perhaps being problematic.  This is
> something where I think we'll need one or two folks to set the tone for the
> rest of us to follow.
>
> Thanks
> Joe
>
> On Fri, Nov 28, 2014 at 12:07 PM, Adam Taft <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > +1 to the "git workflow".  Quoting Atlassian:
> >
> > "Maintenance or “hotfix” branches are used to quickly patch production
> > releases. This is the only branch that should fork directly off of
> master.
> > As soon as the fix is complete, it should be merged into both master and
> > develop (or the current release branch), and master should be tagged with
> > an updated version number."
> >
> > We should reflect on what the NiFi pre-OSS development model looks like
> and
> > how it could be improved from a prescribed workflow like the "git
> > workflow.".  The concept that hotfixes should be applied directly to a
> > release (and merged with the develop branch) is something we have done
> > poorly to date.  We have tended to flush all changes (whether new
> > experimental features or hot fixes) down onto the same release, which has
> > caused stability problems too many times to count.
> >
> > Knowing how we work today, if it were me, I would suggest using the above
> > workflow combined with the "forking workflow" to guard access to the
> > production release (master) branches.  A very small subset of the
> > incubator's commiters should have the ability to merge the "develop"
> branch
> > down to a master "release" branch.  It would be ideal to have someone who
> > is NOT performing the majority of changes on the "develop" branch take
> this
> > role to coordinate releases, ensure minimal coding standards, run through
> > unit and integration tests, before signing off on the release and issuing
> > the release artifacts.
> >
> > Adam
> >
> >
> >
> > On Fri, Nov 28, 2014 at 4:11 AM, Sergio Fernández <[email protected]>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Just in case it help, in Marmotta we follow Giflow with very good
> > results:
> > >
> > > http://marmotta.apache.org/development#Source_code
> > >
> > > Further reading:
> > >
> > > http://nvie.com/posts/a-successful-git-branching-model/
> > > http://www.atlassian.com/git/workflows#!workflow-gitflow
> > >
> > > Hope that helps.
> > >
> > > On 26/11/14 17:35, Tony Kurc wrote:
> > >
> > >> I wanted to kick off a discussion about workflow in git. There are a
> lot
> > >> of
> > >> techniques in git for working effectively as a team, managing several
> > >> product versions at once, and for branching and merging code back in.
> It
> > >> looks like several other apache projects have guides for their team
> > >> conventions, such as Deltaspike [1] and Accumulo [2], I think it would
> > be
> > >> prudent to work on some conventions for NiFi. I've used several
> styles,
> > >> one
> > >> of which works well for other projects I've worked on is called
> gitflow
> > >> [3]. I like the concepts of gitflow, but I really don't like depending
> > on
> > >> maven plugins to execute the conventions. I'd be in favor of something
> > >> like
> > >> gitflow, not sure if others had opinions.
> > >>
> > >> Tony
> > >>
> > >> [1]https://deltaspike.apache.org/suggested-git-workflows.html
> > >> [2] https://accumulo.apache.org/git.html
> > >> [3]
> > >> https://www.atlassian.com/git/tutorials/comparing-workflows/
> > >> gitflow-workflow/
> > >>
> > >>
> > > --
> > > Sergio Fernández
> > > Partner Technology Manager
> > > Redlink GmbH
> > > m: +43 660 2747 925
> > > e: [email protected]
> > > w: http://redlink.co
> > >
> >
>

Reply via email to