On Thu, Jul 19, 2012 at 5:40 PM, Sylvester Keil <[email protected]>wrote:
> Another question we should keep in mind whether it may not be easier to
> work on the master branch and have separate release branches? Especially if
> we may want to keep separate versions of styles in the future (i.e., 1.0
> branch, 1.0.1 branch).
>
I think nobody objects against having separate branches for the different
CSL releases. The minimal branch structure would then be: "0.8.1", "1.0",
"1.0.1" (and so on), "master".
To enable people to subscribe to a CSL branch without having to worry that
this cloned branch changes version (which would happen in "master" with our
current setup ), we would need a branch for the current CSL release, in
addition to branches for older CSL releases.
That arrangement by itself however doesn't solve the problem of preventing
invalid styles from ending up in the version branches, and we'll likely
want to be able to accept patches for older CSL versions. I can think of
two options here:
a) we keep using "master" for accepting CSL styles of the most recent CSL
version, and allow direct commits and merging of pull requests with invalid
CSL styles. We also accept pull requests to version branches of older CSL
releases, but only once Travis CI has checked them. A GitHub service hook
can be used to check the "master" branch after each commit, and push the
commit to the most recent CSL version branch if there are no errors (the
service hook script can either wait for Travis CI or run the tests itself).
b) we keep using "master" for accepting CSL styles of the most recent CSL
version, but only accept pull requests. We also accept pull requests to
version branches of older CSL releases. In both cases, we would only merge
pull requests once Travis CI has checked them. A GitHub service hook can be
used to automatically push any changes made to "master" to the most recent
CSL version branch.
The downside of only relying on pull requests is that fixing small errors
can be cumbersome (you have to download the file(s) by hand via the GitHub
web interface), because the CSL team members typically won't have commit
access to the fork of the person making the pull request. In some cases it
might be easier to accept broken styles and fix them up after merging.
Rintze
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Live Security Virtual Conference
Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and
threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions
will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware
threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/
_______________________________________________
xbiblio-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/xbiblio-devel
