Re: [PROPOSAL] Archiving git branches
+1 On Wed, Oct 7, 2020 at 5:11 PM Joan Touzet wrote: > > Hi there, > > I'd like to clean up our branches in git on the main couchdb repo. This > would involve deleting some of our obsolete branches, after tagging the > final revision on each branch. This way, we retain the history but the > branch no longer appears in the dropdown on GitHub, or in git branch > listings at the cli. > > Example process: > > git tag archive/1.3.x 1.3.x > git branch -d 1.3.x > git push origin :1.3.x > git push --tags > > If we ever needed the branch back, we just: > > git checkout -b 1.3.x archive/1.3.x > > I would propose to do this for all branches except: > > main > master (for now) > 2.3.x > 3.x > prototype/fdb-layer > > ...plus any branches that have been touched in the past 90 days, that > still have open PRs, or that someone specifically asks me to retain in > this thread. > > I'd also like to do this on couchdb-documentation and couchdb-fauxton. > > I would propose to do this about 1 week from now, let's say on October 15th. > > Thoughts? > > -Joan "fall cleaning" Touzet
Re: [PROPOSAL] Archiving git branches
Hi Alex, nice to see you! On 08/10/2020 04:57, Alexander Shorin wrote: +1, but... Old release branches could be just dropped without a worry. If something there wasn't released since today - well, nobody actually has any need for it. If someone does - make a release, tag it and drop the branch. Unexpetable action. The only release branches I'm proposing to keep are those that are nominally still active. We haven't officially said that we're done with 2.x releases yet - if you want to propose a VOTE on that, please do so. 3.x and main track active releases. master needs to stay until Paul's work to replace it with main is done. And I'm not sure everything from prototype/fdb-layer is in main yet, I'll let active devs on it comment. The work to add the tags for restoration is optional, but doesn't hurt anyone. 90 days is quite long. 30 would be more than enough according to actual activity. Just an "overabundance of caution" :) And don't we have a policy that merged branches should be deleted automatically as well? Yes, but in certain cases (like nebraska-merge) we've been lenient. Obviously these can be cleaned up with prejudice. -Joan
Re: [PROPOSAL] Archiving git branches
+1, but... Old release branches could be just dropped without a worry. If something there wasn't released since today - well, nobody actually has any need for it. If someone does - make a release, tag it and drop the branch. Unexpetable action. 90 days is quite long. 30 would be more than enough according to actual activity. And don't we have a policy that merged branches should be deleted automatically as well? -- ,,,^..^,,, On Thu, Oct 8, 2020 at 1:11 AM Joan Touzet wrote: > Hi there, > > I'd like to clean up our branches in git on the main couchdb repo. This > would involve deleting some of our obsolete branches, after tagging the > final revision on each branch. This way, we retain the history but the > branch no longer appears in the dropdown on GitHub, or in git branch > listings at the cli. > > Example process: > > git tag archive/1.3.x 1.3.x > git branch -d 1.3.x > git push origin :1.3.x > git push --tags > > If we ever needed the branch back, we just: > > git checkout -b 1.3.x archive/1.3.x > > I would propose to do this for all branches except: > > main > master (for now) > 2.3.x > 3.x > prototype/fdb-layer > > ...plus any branches that have been touched in the past 90 days, that > still have open PRs, or that someone specifically asks me to retain in > this thread. > > I'd also like to do this on couchdb-documentation and couchdb-fauxton. > > I would propose to do this about 1 week from now, let's say on October > 15th. > > Thoughts? > > -Joan "fall cleaning" Touzet >
