1 |
On Tue, 11 Aug 2015 16:19:12 +0200 |
2 |
hasufell <hasufell@g.o> wrote: |
3 |
|
4 |
> On 08/11/2015 04:10 PM, Alexis Ballier wrote: |
5 |
> > On Tue, 11 Aug 2015 16:01:05 +0200 |
6 |
> > Michał Górny <mgorny@g.o> wrote: |
7 |
> > |
8 |
> >> Dnia 2015-08-11, o godz. 15:52:16 |
9 |
> >> Patrice Clement <monsieurp@g.o> napisał(a): |
10 |
> >> |
11 |
> >>> Hi there |
12 |
> >>> |
13 |
> >>> According to |
14 |
> >>> https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Gentoo_git_workflow#Branching_Model, |
15 |
> >>> "there may be developer-specific, task-specific, project-specific |
16 |
> >>> branches etc". As far as I understand, it means I can go and |
17 |
> >>> create my own branch on the main repository and push it and it |
18 |
> >>> gets spread all over the place. Is that correct? |
19 |
> >>> |
20 |
> >>> Could someone explain to me the rationale behind this decision? |
21 |
> >>> |
22 |
> >>> Truth to be told, I kinda dislike the fact any developer can do |
23 |
> >>> this. |
24 |
> >> |
25 |
> >> As long as it's used with caution, I don't see a problem. |
26 |
> > |
27 |
> > Then we should define 'caution' I think :) |
28 |
> > |
29 |
> >> Of course it |
30 |
> >> would be bad if everyone pushed branches for any minor change. |
31 |
> >> However, if there is a long-term work going on a branch, I don't |
32 |
> >> see a problem with keeping it public. |
33 |
> > |
34 |
> > Most, if not all, projects I've seen use forks for this. |
35 |
> |
36 |
> Blender does not, afaik. And I've seen a lot of projects doing that. |
37 |
> The difference between e.g. "myremote/featurebranch" and |
38 |
> "upstream/featurebranch" is just that someone has looked over |
39 |
> "upstream/featurebranch" and that it requires pull requests to get |
40 |
> stuff in (so the developer work happens in their developer forks, but |
41 |
> the results still get into the same upstream branch). |
42 |
|
43 |
You can merge remote tracking branches just the same you merge |
44 |
'upstream' branches. You can even rebase them which tends to give a |
45 |
better history but is harder if you forbid non fast-forward pushes |
46 |
to gentoo.git. Pull requests are only useful for pre-commit reviews. |
47 |
|
48 |
> That would, for example, make sense for libressl. Since we basically |
49 |
> just overwrite a lot of ebuilds to be able to test them with libressl |
50 |
> patches. That is currently done with an overlay which always opens up |
51 |
> the problem that we lack behind the tree and undesired openssl ebuilds |
52 |
> leak in for the user, because of tree-overlay desync. |
53 |
|
54 |
Branch or remote, this doesn't change anything since no commit to |
55 |
master will automagically update your branch. The only thing you're |
56 |
achieving is a fixed gentoo-x86 tree snapshot + an overlay in the same |
57 |
repo, which you could already do anyway. |