It’s a nice plan

On Tue, Nov 26, 2019 at 7:10 PM Bobby Bruce <[email protected]> wrote:

> Dear all,
>
> As you know, at the end of this quarter we will be releasing gem5-19, the
> first official release of gem5. As part of this release we'd like to change
> our git branching structure. Therefore, I'm writing to ask for feedback on
> what we have planned and whether it can be improved upon.
>
> We'd like to have a git repo structure similar to that used in gitflow
> development: https://nvie.com/posts/a-successful-git-branching-model .
> I've
> seen this model work well before, as it has some worthwhile abstractors for
> public, open source git projects with regular releases. What I'd like to
> incorporate from this model is the following:
>
> - Two permanent branches: master and develop.
> - "develop" would function as master does now. This would be the main point
> in which changes are applied between gem5 releases.
> - Upon a new release of gem5, the develop branch would be merged into
> master and a new git tag added to master indicating the release version.
> Ergo, the master branch would always contain the latest release of gem5.
> - If a quick hotfix is needed, a new "hotfix" branch would be created and
> merged into both the develop and master branches upon completion. This
> would also require a new tag on the master branch. (I suggest using the
> standard "Version [Major].[Minor].[Hotfix]" version numbering system. I.e.,
> the first version would be V19.0.0, a hotfix to this would make it V19.0.1,
> and a minor release would make it V19.1.0).
> - The creation of feature branches would be permitted. These branches would
> encapsulate the gradual development of large features (i.e., ones carried
> out over many commits). When complete a feature branch would be merged into
> the develop branch. They'd be no obligation to use feature branches though
> we believe they could be of value in certain cases. For example, if a
> developer wishes to postpone a developed feature for a given gem5 release
> (e.g., something more suited for a major release rather than a minor one),
> then they could submit their changes as a feature branch and wait to merge
> to the develop branch at a later date.
>
> I believe this setup would make our development process run smoother and
> give gem5 users more stability. Day-to-day development wouldn't change much
> as committing to the develop branch would work in the same way as
> submitting to master does now.
>
> If anyone has any thoughts about this, I'd be happy to hear from you.
>
> Kind regards,
> Bobby
> --
> Dr. Bobby R. Bruce
> Room 2235,
> Kemper Hall, UC Davis
> Davis,
> CA, 95616
> _______________________________________________
> gem5-dev mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://m5sim.org/mailman/listinfo/gem5-dev
_______________________________________________
gem5-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://m5sim.org/mailman/listinfo/gem5-dev

Reply via email to