Re: [gentoo-dev] Developer branches on proj/gentoo

[Alexis Ballier]

On Tue, 11 Aug 2015 10:26:46 -0400
"Anthony G. Basile" <blueness@g.o> wrote:

> On 8/11/15 10:19 AM, hasufell wrote:
> > On 08/11/2015 04:10 PM, Alexis Ballier wrote:
> >> On Tue, 11 Aug 2015 16:01:05 +0200
> >> Michał Górny <mgorny@g.o> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Dnia 2015-08-11, o godz. 15:52:16
> >>> Patrice Clement <monsieurp@g.o> napisał(a):
> >>>
> >>>> Hi there
> >>>>
> >>>> According to
> >>>> https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Gentoo_git_workflow#Branching_Model,
> >>>> "there may be developer-specific, task-specific, project-specific
> >>>> branches etc". As far as I understand, it means I can go and
> >>>> create my own branch on the main repository and push it and it
> >>>> gets spread all over the place. Is that correct?
> >>>>
> >>>> Could someone explain to me the rationale behind this decision?
> >>>>
> >>>> Truth to be told, I kinda dislike the fact any developer can do
> >>>> this.
> >>> As long as it's used with caution, I don't see a problem.
> >> Then we should define 'caution' I think :)
> >>
> >>
> I would not say "caution" so much as good judgment.  The first
> example that came to mind was working with the profiles which crosses
> many directories and files.  In the past when I did restructuring to
> the hardened profiles, I tested by using a branch of the hardened-dev
> overlay.  It was annoying and I would do a bind mount over
> /usr/portage/profiles and had to rebase manually.  A test branch of
> the the main tree which could get rebased and eventually merged back
> would make the workflow so much better.  Another example was when we
> revitalized the selinux policies.  There were hundreds of commits to
> be done.  A branch here that got merged back would be ideal.


you probably did this before it happened, but a solution in the last
months could have been to fork gentoo-portage-rsync-mirror, merge it
back (or better: rebase onto it) from time to time, and do a squashed PR
that you can merge with mgorny's scripts.