[Server-devel] [XSCE] XSCE/xsce and activitycetral/dxs repository integration in a branch preserving history

[Tim Moody]

which commit was fa2d59?

This is the same discussion we had yesterday about when we move from dxs to xsce.  What would be the criteria for deciding to merge the dxs branch into master?

And it still doesn’t address the question of where ongoing differences between dxs and xsce will live.

I’m OK with 1-3, but I’m skeptical about working on the dxs branch.  I guess I’m OK with doing a git merge instead of copy to get dxs into xsce as long as people don’t lose work, but now rather than later.

Tim

From: Anish Mangal 
Sent: Wednesday, October 23, 2013 2:51 PM
To: xsce-devel 
Cc: XS Devel 
Subject: Re: [XSCE] XSCE/xsce and activitycetral/dxs repository integration in a branch preserving history

I think this approach makes sense. As I understand it: 

* We want to be good historians and follow the proper workflow, which also implies that "master" should ideally never be broken.
* While we are switching to ansible, we do the switch *in a branch* called dxs and *not master*
* All fixes and porting efforts happen on the dxs branch. This implies that ALL pull requests must be created against xsce:dxs rather than xsce:master.
* Once the port is done, it is merged into master. All development happens on master.

The risk we run is that the dxs branch will become the active branch being worked upon. Which is non-ideal (All development must ideally happen against master). So we have a couple of options:

a. Merge the dxs branch with the current set of dxs commits into master. Follow all development there.
b. Set a hard deadline for merging dxs into master.

I think I like option a. better.
Option b. has the advantage of ensuring a working master. 

Thoughts?


Regardless of which path we choose, it's a good idea to keep the dxs history, and the dxs branch should be created (Steps 1. and 2. from Miguel's email)

Anish


On Wed, Oct 23, 2013 at 9:28 AM, Miguel González <migonzalvar at activitycentral.com> wrote:

  My suggestion to  integrate "activitycetral/dxs" into "XSCE/xsce" preserving history and using a branch for easier comparison is:

  1. revert xsce/master to fa2d59,
  2. create a 'dxs' branch

  3. merge activitycentral/dxs commits to this new branch preserving history


  This new branch (XSCE/xsce at dxs) will be the canonical repository for the migration and everybody will pull request against this branch.


  Detailed procedure on a fresh repository
  ----

  1. revert

  Clean repo:
  ```
  git clone git at github.com:XSCE/xsce.git

  cd xsce
  ```

  The actual revert:
  ```
  git revert -m 1 b1638cd --no-edit

  ```

  Submit changes:
  ```
  git push origin
  ```

  2. create branch

  ```
  git branch dxs
  git checkout dxs
  git push origin dxs
  ```

  3. merge

  Fetch dxs repository:
  ```
  git remote add dxs git at github.com:activitycentral/dxs

  git fetch dxs
  ```

  And now the critical part, the actual merge:
  ```

  git merge --no-ff -s recursive -X ours --no-edit dxs/master

  ```

  Push!
  ```
  git push origin dxs
  ````

  So, anyone with write permission on xsce can do this.

  You can check how would be the resulting repo in my personal clone copy in https://github.com/migonzalvar/xsce.



  -- 

  Miguel González
  Activity Central: http://www.activitycentral.com

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.laptop.org/pipermail/server-devel/attachments/20131023/c2904680/attachment.html>