The idea of release branches is to only include relevant fixes on the branches.
It's usually easy to "git cherry-pick" the respective commit into the master or
from master to the release branch - depending on where it got fixed first.
For a public project like Log4j2 there probably would be a maximum of two actively supported release branches, so merging conflicts should not be an issue. If master and release branch really diverge
too much for "git cherry-pick" to work, the respective change would have to be applied to both branches manually. Since we are talking about patch-level changes, that should not be a lot of work in
99% of all cases.
At least that's our experience. We have been doing this for many years.
Regards,
Steffen
On 09/13/2016 08:48 AM, Ralph Goers wrote:
I am not concerned with running the release plugin. I am concerned when we have
patches for the release branch that we make sure that they are also pushed to
master. Where I work the release branch is always merged back to master, but
that means any patches should really only be applied to the release branch and
let master be updated when the merge is done. This can get quite messy. An
alternative is to apply the patches to both branches and not merge, which runs
the risk that things might be missed. To be honest, the reason we haven’t
created release branches is because I don’t think any of us really want to
manage that.
Ralph
On Sep 12, 2016, at 11:38 PM, Steffen Offermann <steffen.offerm...@aixigo.de>
wrote:
This is how we do it at our company:
- start a new artifact on branch master, setting the version number in pom.xml
to 0.1.0-SNAPSHOT
- create CHANGELOG.md, add a headline "## Last Changes", and during
development, add an entry with a link to the respective JIRA issue for each solved
ticket, e.g.
"- [XYZ-4711](https://.../browse/XYZ-4711): Did this and that."
- to release v0.1.0:
- run "mvn release:branch -DbranchName=release-0.1.x" (using 0.2.0-SNAPSHOT
as the version number for the next iteration when asked)
- git checkout release-0.1.x
- edit CHANGELOG.md (i.e. replace "Last Changes" with "v0.1.0")
- git add CHANGELOG.md ; git commit -m"Prepared artifact for release of
v0.1.0"
- mvn release:prepare (using 0.1.0 as version number, v0.1.0 as scm tag, and
0.1.1-SNAPSHOT for the next iteration's version number)
- mvn release:perform
- git push -u origin release-0.1.x ; git push -u origin v0.1.0
- git checkout master
- edit CHANGELOG.md, adding version information "## v0.1.0"
- git add CHANGELOG.md ; git commit -m"Prepared artifact for development of
v0.2.0" ; git push -u origin master
- Repeat for each new release
On 09/13/2016 01:39 AM, Matt Sicker wrote:
It sounds like the idea is to open up a branch for each 2.x release so we can
backport specific bugfixes to the previous release branch to make minor version
releases. We could either fork from the
last 2.6.x release to maintain a 2.6 branch, or we could start with 2.7.
If there's an easy way to merge specific code changes to multiple branches,
maybe we could adopt that, but I'm not exactly sure how well that would work in
practice unless we fix that end of line
problem that keeps popping up in certain commits (the ones that rewrite the
whole file). That would cause annoying merge conflicts between major release
branches.
On 12 September 2016 at 17:50, Remko Popma <remko.po...@gmail.com
<mailto:remko.po...@gmail.com>> wrote:
Back to the discussion about the release process, concretely what are we
going to do differently from what we do now?
On Sat, Sep 10, 2016 at 3:26 AM, Gary Gregory <garydgreg...@gmail.com
<mailto:garydgreg...@gmail.com>> wrote:
Remko has a branch to merge.
I'd like to hear from Steffen Offermann
<https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ViewProfile.jspa?name=SteffenO> who has
been testing master...
Gary
On Fri, Sep 9, 2016 at 11:13 AM, Matt Sicker <boa...@gmail.com
<mailto:boa...@gmail.com>> wrote:
Are we all caught up with the desired branches we wanted merged?
On 9 September 2016 at 13:08, Remko Popma <remko.po...@gmail.com
<mailto:remko.po...@gmail.com>> wrote:
What is our thinking on this for the upcoming release?
On Fri, Sep 2, 2016 at 8:22 PM, Mikael Ståldal <mikael.stal...@magine.com
<mailto:mikael.stal...@magine.com>> wrote:
On LOG4J2-1548, Remko Popma
<https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ViewProfile.jspa?name=remkop%40yahoo.com>
wrote:
I'm okay with changing the process but we need to think
through the implications of maintaining multiple branches. I don't mind fixing
a bug in, say, the 2.7.x maintenance
branch and merging that fix also into the 2.8 new
features branch, but what do we do with subsequent releases?
Once we are on version 2.10, and we receive a bug report
against version 2.7, do we add a fix to the maintenance branches 2.7.x, 2.8.x
and 2.9.x in addition to the 2.10 new
feature branch? When do we stop supporting old
maintenance branches?
I think we should make sure that we can always easily make
patch releases on the latest minor release (like 2.6.3 now), and do so whenever
a serious bug is discovered and fixed
(like LOG4J-1548).
I don't think that we should normally make patch releases on
older minor releases (like 2.5.1 now) though. That should only be done in
exceptional cases, and we should not prepare
for it any more than keeping a tag for each release in Git.
I also think that we should consider ways of reducing the
number of serious issues introduced in minor releases, such as making a public
beta release before a minor release. (I was
not really satisfied with the quality of the 2.6 release,
and I think we should try to do better in the future.)
--
MagineTV
*Mikael Ståldal*
Senior software developer
*Magine TV*
mikael.stal...@magine.com <mailto:mikael.stal...@magine.com>
Grev Turegatan 3 | 114 46 Stockholm, Sweden | www.magine.com
<http://www.magine.com/>
Privileged and/or Confidential Information may be contained
in this message. If you are not the addressee indicated in this message
(or responsible for delivery of the message to such a
person), you may not copy or deliver this message to anyone. In such case,
you should destroy this message and kindly notify the sender
by reply email.
--
Matt Sicker <boa...@gmail.com <mailto:boa...@gmail.com>>
--
E-Mail: garydgreg...@gmail.com <mailto:garydgreg...@gmail.com> |
ggreg...@apache.org <mailto:ggreg...@apache.org>
Java Persistence with Hibernate, Second Edition
<http://www.manning.com/bauer3/>
JUnit in Action, Second Edition <http://www.manning.com/tahchiev/>
Spring Batch in Action <http://www.manning.com/templier/>
Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com
<http://garygregory.wordpress.com/>
Home: http://garygregory.com/
Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory
--
Matt Sicker <boa...@gmail.com <mailto:boa...@gmail.com>>
--
aixigo AG - financial solutions & technology
Karl-Friedrich-Straße 68, 52072 Aachen, Germany
fon: +49 (0)241 559709-65, fax: +49 (0)241 559709-99
eMail: steffen.offerm...@aixigo.de, web: http://www.aixigo.de
Amtsgericht Aachen - HRB 8057
Vorstand: Erich Borsch, Christian Friedrich, Tobias Haustein
Vors. des Aufsichtsrates: Prof. Dr. Rüdiger von Nitzsch
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: log4j-dev-unsubscr...@logging.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: log4j-dev-h...@logging.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: log4j-dev-unsubscr...@logging.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: log4j-dev-h...@logging.apache.org
--
aixigo AG - financial solutions & technology
Karl-Friedrich-Straße 68, 52072 Aachen, Germany
fon: +49 (0)241 559709-65, fax: +49 (0)241 559709-99
eMail: steffen.offerm...@aixigo.de, web: http://www.aixigo.de
Amtsgericht Aachen - HRB 8057
Vorstand: Erich Borsch, Christian Friedrich, Tobias Haustein
Vors. des Aufsichtsrates: Prof. Dr. Rüdiger von Nitzsch
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: log4j-dev-unsubscr...@logging.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: log4j-dev-h...@logging.apache.org
