fenics team mailing list archive

[Martin Sandve Alnæs <martinal@xxxxxxxxx>]

On 31 October 2011 03:17, Andy Ray Terrel <andy.terrel@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Here's the "model" that I've been using on several projects with teams
> located across the globe.
>
> http://nvie.com/posts/a-successful-git-branching-model/
>
> There are a few differences here between the models and I don't know
> how feasible they are with bazaar.

I see 'master' here as an alias for 'the latest tag in the latest
release branch'. We want to keep the release branches to allow easy
hotfixes towards any previous release later. I think that is valuable,
and I don't see what having the master branch solves?


> 1) Feature branches for work allows for multiple people to be working
> on different parts of the code easily

We do something like this regularly, but I think we mostly use
personal branches with no feature name though. There could be
improvements to the way we use these branches.


> 2) Keep the hotfixes on a branches that are pulled into both the
> mainline development and the stable release

With the model Anders posted we would do hotfixes in the release
branch and make a 1.0.x bugfix release. This would be merged into
mainline (trunk). No need for a separate hotfix branch, since the
release branch should have only bugfixes for that release.


> 3) Trims branches as soon as possible so you have a clear
> understanding of where work is going.

I think we understand where work is going with the new model: Features
go into trunk, and only bugfixes in release branches.

To reduce the cost of keeping release branches 'forever', we may mark
old releases as obsolete in launchpad at some point and stop fixing
bugs.


> Anywho, my thought has always been that FEniCS model makes it
> difficult for non-(Simula + Garth's lab) to contribute.  I've actually
> had people tell me this at conferences.  But then again I've also been
> told that FEniCS doesn't want users as well.

Not sure what the "FEniCS model" is here, but maybe that's part of the problem?

Martin


> -- Andy
>
>
> On Fri, Oct 28, 2011 at 5:06 AM, Anders Logg <logg@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> Dear all,
>>
>> There has been some concern regarding the lack of predictability in
>> FEniCS releases. Yesterday, some of us at Simula met to discuss what
>> can be done to improve the situation. The result is the following
>> draft for a future development model:
>>
>>  http://fenicsproject.org/contributing/development_model.html
>>
>> Please comment on the draft and suggest corrections.
>>
>> The new development model calls for a "release manager" to coordinate
>> each stable release (currently 1.0). I can volunteer to serve as
>> release manager this time. I'd be happy to step aside if someone else
>> is motivated.
>>
>> I know some of you, in particular those from Simula who helped draft
>> the proposal, have already said OK, but please respond anyway for the
>> record.
>>
>> --
>> Anders
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~fenics
>> Post to     : fenics@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~fenics
>> More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~fenics
> Post to     : fenics@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~fenics
> More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
>