Re: [Development] Updating/changing "default" branch for qtbase repository

[Kari Oikarinen]

On 16.9.2019 15.10, Lars Knoll wrote:
> 
>> On 16 Sep 2019, at 13:26, Albert Astals Cid via Development 
>> mailto:development@qt-project.org>> wrote:
>>
>> El dilluns, 16 de setembre de 2019, a les 13:22:22 CEST, Frederik Gladhorn va
>> escriure:
>>> On mandag 16. september 2019 12:22:06 CEST Edward Welbourne wrote:
 Albert Astals Cid (16 September 2019 11:33) wrote:
> If i do
>
>  git clone ssh://myu...@codereview.qt-project.org/qt/qtbase
>
> I get branch 5.12
>
> Given that 5.12 is now on cherry-pick mode (AFAIK) would it make more
> sense to default to branch 5.13?

 We have a history of setting a release branch (stable, I think; perhaps
 LTS) as the default branch in our repositories.  This means that anyone
 who mirrors our repositories gets that as their default branch (unless /
 until they update it).  I don't see this as a good choice: getting dev
 on the branches that have it would make more sense.

 IIUC, the rationale for the present practice is that we want to make it
 easier for folk who send us fixes.  I honestly doubt we'd suffer harm by
 having fixes sent to us on dev a bit more often (and other changes, that
 *do* belong on dev, being sent first to another branch would surely
 happen less often); reviewers can surely help the contributor get it
 onto the right branch, if there's a good reason why dev isn't good
 enough.

 ... now, where have I met this discussion recently ?
 I'm quite sure I have, but can't remember where ...
>>>
>>> I also had a chat about this recently and the Gerrit admins in general don't
>>> really fell like constantly changing the default branch, so I'd be much in
>>> favor of just moving all default branches to dev.
>>
>> Same here, i think dev makes sense too, but didn't want to propose something
>> so radical myself ^_^
> 
> +1 for having it pointing to dev and never changing it again. It’s also more 
> in 
> line with most other git repos out there :)

There doesn't seem to be opposition to this. Any single choice also can't always
be correct, because the right branch to target depends on what kind of change
you are working on.

I've gone ahead and changed the default branches to be dev.

-- 
Kari

> 
> Cheers,
> Lars
> 
>>
>> Cheers,
>>  Albert
>>
>>>
>>> In my opinion we should mostly care about the dev branch, since that's where
>>> all future development needs to happen. Moving changes back into older
>>> releases can of course be important, but that's not what most people should
>>> have to worry about.
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> Frederik
>>>
 Eddy.

 ___
 Development mailing list
 Development@qt-project.org 
 https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development
>>
>>
>> --
>> Albert Astals Cid |albert.astals@kdab.com 
>> | Senior Software Engineer
>> Klarälvdalens Datakonsult AB, a KDAB Group company
>> Tel: Sweden (HQ) +46-563-540090, USA +1-866-777-KDAB(5322)
>> KDAB - The Qt, C++ and OpenGL Experts
>>
>> ___
>> Development mailing list
>> Development@qt-project.org 
>> https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development
> 
> 
> ___
> Development mailing list
> Development@qt-project.org
> https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development
> 

___
Development mailing list
Development@qt-project.org
https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development

Re: [Development] Updating/changing "default" branch for qtbase repository

[Olivier Goffart]

On 17.09.19 11:27, Kevin Funk via Development wrote:

OT: Out of curiosity: Why was "dev" chosen over "master" as main development
branch in the first place? What's the benefit? This is also something which
might confuse new contributors easily, as it's not the Git standard
nomenclature.

If we ever wanted to change that, then now would be the time.

I'm sure this has been answered else where but I can't find a hint of it.



I did a bit of digging, it was all discussed in this thread:
https://lists.qt-project.org/pipermail/development/2012-September/006691.html
And the answer to the question is at the beginning of this mail:
https://lists.qt-project.org/pipermail/development/2012-September/006697.html

Long story short: For Qt 5, Qt went to a dev/stable/release model without 
branch for specific version numbers. With the default branch being 'stable'.
And dev was not named master because 'master' is usually the default branch and 
a different name was there to indicate that it is not the default.


--
Olivier
___
Development mailing list
Development@qt-project.org
https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development

Re: [Development] Updating/changing "default" branch for qtbase repository

[Kevin Funk via Development]

On Monday, 16 September 2019 14:10:51 CEST Lars Knoll wrote:
> On 16 Sep 2019, at 13:26, Albert Astals Cid via Development
> mailto:development@qt-project.org>> wrote:
 
> El dilluns, 16 de setembre de 2019, a les 13:22:22 CEST, Frederik Gladhorn
> va
 escriure:
> On mandag 16. september 2019 12:22:06 CEST Edward Welbourne wrote:
> Albert Astals Cid (16 September 2019 11:33) wrote:
> If i do
> 
>  git clone ssh://myu...@codereview.qt-project.org/qt/qtbase
> 
> I get branch 5.12
> 
> Given that 5.12 is now on cherry-pick mode (AFAIK) would it make more
> sense to default to branch 5.13?
> 
> We have a history of setting a release branch (stable, I think; perhaps
> LTS) as the default branch in our repositories.  This means that anyone
> who mirrors our repositories gets that as their default branch (unless /
> until they update it).  I don't see this as a good choice: getting dev
> on the branches that have it would make more sense.
> 
> IIUC, the rationale for the present practice is that we want to make it
> easier for folk who send us fixes.  I honestly doubt we'd suffer harm by
> having fixes sent to us on dev a bit more often (and other changes, that
> *do* belong on dev, being sent first to another branch would surely
> happen less often); reviewers can surely help the contributor get it
> onto the right branch, if there's a good reason why dev isn't good
> enough.
> 
> ... now, where have I met this discussion recently ?
> I'm quite sure I have, but can't remember where ...
> 
> I also had a chat about this recently and the Gerrit admins in general
> don't
 really fell like constantly changing the default branch, so I'd be
> much in favor of just moving all default branches to dev.
> 
> Same here, i think dev makes sense too, but didn't want to propose
> something
 so radical myself ^_^
> 
> +1 for having it pointing to dev and never changing it again. It’s also more
> in line with most other git repos out there :)

OT: Out of curiosity: Why was "dev" chosen over "master" as main development 
branch in the first place? What's the benefit? This is also something which 
might confuse new contributors easily, as it's not the Git standard 
nomenclature.

If we ever wanted to change that, then now would be the time.

I'm sure this has been answered else where but I can't find a hint of it.

Regards,
Kevin

 
> Cheers,
> Lars
> 
> 
> Cheers,
>  Albert
> 
> 
> In my opinion we should mostly care about the dev branch, since that's
> where
 all future development needs to happen. Moving changes back into
> older releases can of course be important, but that's not what most people
> should have to worry about.
> 
> Cheers,
> Frederik
> 
> Eddy.
> 
> ___
> Development mailing list
> Development@qt-project.org
> https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development
> 
> 
> --
> Albert Astals Cid |
> albert.astals@kdab.com | Senior
> Software Engineer
 Klarälvdalens Datakonsult AB, a KDAB Group company
> Tel: Sweden (HQ) +46-563-540090, USA +1-866-777-KDAB(5322)
> KDAB - The Qt, C++ and OpenGL Experts
> 
> ___
> Development mailing list
> Development@qt-project.org
> https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development
> 


-- 
Kevin Funk | kevin.f...@kdab.com | Senior Software Engineer
KDAB (Deutschland) GmbH, a KDAB Group company
Tel: +49-30-521325470
KDAB - The Qt, C++ and OpenGL Experts

smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
___
Development mailing list
Development@qt-project.org
https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development

Re: [Development] Updating/changing "default" branch for qtbase repository

[Lars Knoll]

On 16 Sep 2019, at 13:26, Albert Astals Cid via Development 
mailto:development@qt-project.org>> wrote:

El dilluns, 16 de setembre de 2019, a les 13:22:22 CEST, Frederik Gladhorn va
escriure:
On mandag 16. september 2019 12:22:06 CEST Edward Welbourne wrote:
Albert Astals Cid (16 September 2019 11:33) wrote:
If i do

 git clone ssh://myu...@codereview.qt-project.org/qt/qtbase

I get branch 5.12

Given that 5.12 is now on cherry-pick mode (AFAIK) would it make more
sense to default to branch 5.13?

We have a history of setting a release branch (stable, I think; perhaps
LTS) as the default branch in our repositories.  This means that anyone
who mirrors our repositories gets that as their default branch (unless /
until they update it).  I don't see this as a good choice: getting dev
on the branches that have it would make more sense.

IIUC, the rationale for the present practice is that we want to make it
easier for folk who send us fixes.  I honestly doubt we'd suffer harm by
having fixes sent to us on dev a bit more often (and other changes, that
*do* belong on dev, being sent first to another branch would surely
happen less often); reviewers can surely help the contributor get it
onto the right branch, if there's a good reason why dev isn't good
enough.

... now, where have I met this discussion recently ?
I'm quite sure I have, but can't remember where ...

I also had a chat about this recently and the Gerrit admins in general don't
really fell like constantly changing the default branch, so I'd be much in
favor of just moving all default branches to dev.

Same here, i think dev makes sense too, but didn't want to propose something
so radical myself ^_^

+1 for having it pointing to dev and never changing it again. It’s also more in 
line with most other git repos out there :)

Cheers,
Lars


Cheers,
 Albert


In my opinion we should mostly care about the dev branch, since that's where
all future development needs to happen. Moving changes back into older
releases can of course be important, but that's not what most people should
have to worry about.

Cheers,
Frederik

Eddy.

___
Development mailing list
Development@qt-project.org
https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development


--
Albert Astals Cid | 
albert.astals@kdab.com | Senior Software 
Engineer
Klarälvdalens Datakonsult AB, a KDAB Group company
Tel: Sweden (HQ) +46-563-540090, USA +1-866-777-KDAB(5322)
KDAB - The Qt, C++ and OpenGL Experts

___
Development mailing list
Development@qt-project.org
https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development

___
Development mailing list
Development@qt-project.org
https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development

Re: [Development] Updating/changing "default" branch for qtbase repository

[Albert Astals Cid via Development]

El dilluns, 16 de setembre de 2019, a les 13:22:22 CEST, Frederik Gladhorn va 
escriure:
> On mandag 16. september 2019 12:22:06 CEST Edward Welbourne wrote:
> > Albert Astals Cid (16 September 2019 11:33) wrote:
> > > If i do
> > > 
> > >   git clone ssh://myu...@codereview.qt-project.org/qt/qtbase
> > > 
> > > I get branch 5.12
> > > 
> > > Given that 5.12 is now on cherry-pick mode (AFAIK) would it make more
> > > sense to default to branch 5.13?
> > 
> > We have a history of setting a release branch (stable, I think; perhaps
> > LTS) as the default branch in our repositories.  This means that anyone
> > who mirrors our repositories gets that as their default branch (unless /
> > until they update it).  I don't see this as a good choice: getting dev
> > on the branches that have it would make more sense.
> > 
> > IIUC, the rationale for the present practice is that we want to make it
> > easier for folk who send us fixes.  I honestly doubt we'd suffer harm by
> > having fixes sent to us on dev a bit more often (and other changes, that
> > *do* belong on dev, being sent first to another branch would surely
> > happen less often); reviewers can surely help the contributor get it
> > onto the right branch, if there's a good reason why dev isn't good
> > enough.
> > 
> > ... now, where have I met this discussion recently ?
> > I'm quite sure I have, but can't remember where ...
> 
> I also had a chat about this recently and the Gerrit admins in general don't
> really fell like constantly changing the default branch, so I'd be much in
> favor of just moving all default branches to dev.

Same here, i think dev makes sense too, but didn't want to propose something 
so radical myself ^_^

Cheers,
  Albert

> 
> In my opinion we should mostly care about the dev branch, since that's where
> all future development needs to happen. Moving changes back into older
> releases can of course be important, but that's not what most people should
> have to worry about.
> 
> Cheers,
> Frederik
> 
> > Eddy.
> > 
> > ___
> > Development mailing list
> > Development@qt-project.org
> > https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development


-- 
Albert Astals Cid | albert.astals@kdab.com | Senior Software Engineer
Klarälvdalens Datakonsult AB, a KDAB Group company
Tel: Sweden (HQ) +46-563-540090, USA +1-866-777-KDAB(5322)
KDAB - The Qt, C++ and OpenGL Experts

___
Development mailing list
Development@qt-project.org
https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development

Re: [Development] Updating/changing "default" branch for qtbase repository

[Frederik Gladhorn]

On mandag 16. september 2019 12:22:06 CEST Edward Welbourne wrote:
> Albert Astals Cid (16 September 2019 11:33) wrote:
> > If i do
> > 
> >   git clone ssh://myu...@codereview.qt-project.org/qt/qtbase
> > 
> > I get branch 5.12
> > 
> > Given that 5.12 is now on cherry-pick mode (AFAIK) would it make more
> > sense to default to branch 5.13?
> 
> We have a history of setting a release branch (stable, I think; perhaps
> LTS) as the default branch in our repositories.  This means that anyone
> who mirrors our repositories gets that as their default branch (unless /
> until they update it).  I don't see this as a good choice: getting dev
> on the branches that have it would make more sense.
> 
> IIUC, the rationale for the present practice is that we want to make it
> easier for folk who send us fixes.  I honestly doubt we'd suffer harm by
> having fixes sent to us on dev a bit more often (and other changes, that
> *do* belong on dev, being sent first to another branch would surely
> happen less often); reviewers can surely help the contributor get it
> onto the right branch, if there's a good reason why dev isn't good
> enough.
> 
> ... now, where have I met this discussion recently ?
> I'm quite sure I have, but can't remember where ...

I also had a chat about this recently and the Gerrit admins in general don't 
really fell like constantly changing the default branch, so I'd be much in 
favor of just moving all default branches to dev.

In my opinion we should mostly care about the dev branch, since that's where 
all future development needs to happen. Moving changes back into older 
releases can of course be important, but that's not what most people should 
have to worry about.

Cheers,
Frederik


> 
>   Eddy.
> ___
> Development mailing list
> Development@qt-project.org
> https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development




___
Development mailing list
Development@qt-project.org
https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development

Re: [Development] Updating/changing "default" branch for qtbase repository

[Edward Welbourne]

Albert Astals Cid (16 September 2019 11:33) wrote:
> If i do
>   git clone ssh://myu...@codereview.qt-project.org/qt/qtbase
>
> I get branch 5.12
>
> Given that 5.12 is now on cherry-pick mode (AFAIK) would it make more sense to
> default to branch 5.13?

We have a history of setting a release branch (stable, I think; perhaps
LTS) as the default branch in our repositories.  This means that anyone
who mirrors our repositories gets that as their default branch (unless /
until they update it).  I don't see this as a good choice: getting dev
on the branches that have it would make more sense.

IIUC, the rationale for the present practice is that we want to make it
easier for folk who send us fixes.  I honestly doubt we'd suffer harm by
having fixes sent to us on dev a bit more often (and other changes, that
*do* belong on dev, being sent first to another branch would surely
happen less often); reviewers can surely help the contributor get it
onto the right branch, if there's a good reason why dev isn't good
enough.

... now, where have I met this discussion recently ?
I'm quite sure I have, but can't remember where ...

Eddy.
___
Development mailing list
Development@qt-project.org
https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development