kicad-developers team mailing list archive

[Jon Evans <jon@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

We already have used temporary branches for major features in the past. I'm
sure we'll continue to do this (through gitlab merge requests) where it
makes sense - it's a lot of work to keep a feature branch in mergeable
state.

-Jon

On Wed, Dec 11, 2019, 10:16 Jonatan Liljedahl <lijon@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> Good points. However, I still think it might make sense to have at
> least one more level of granularity, and use temporary branches for
> major changes etc. so that they can be tested before being merged into
> master. Simply, to make a merge request for big changes even if done
> by one of the core developers. Going back to the 5.1 branch just to
> have a non-crashing version of kicad is quite a leap.
>
> On Wed, Dec 11, 2019 at 3:41 PM Wayne Stambaugh <stambaughw@xxxxxxxxx>
> wrote:
> >
> > We have discussed this before and given that very few users would ever
> > test the development branch(es), I'm not going to change our branching
> > policy.  I don't think it's unfair to ask users who are aware that the
> > master branch (which is the KiCad development branch) is always in a
> > state of flux to deal with a bit of temporary instability in exchange
> > for some comprehensive testing of new features.  Most users seem willing
> > to help with the testing in spite of some minor and sometimes some not
> > so minor inconveniences.  I think have development branches would just
> > slow down how quickly new feature bugs would get fixed.
> >
> > Cheers,
> >
> > Wayne
> >
> > On 12/11/19 9:21 AM, Jonatan Liljedahl wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > Perhaps it would make sense to adopt something like this?
> > >
> https://nvie.com/posts/a-successful-git-branching-model/#the-main-branches
> > >
> > > In short, all development happens on 'develop' branch and only when
> > > this is stable it's merged back to 'master'. One doesn't have to
> > > follow the above model strictly, for example a merge into master
> > > doesn't need to mean "new version to be released".
> > >
> > > Another nice thing is that stuff that are work in progress and not yet
> > > stable can live in a feature branch until it's stable enough to merge
> > > into 'develop'. (For example the new symbol inheritance stuff, which
> > > currently makes the master branch a bit unusable)
> > >
> > > Maybe some of this makes sense, and some not? Just some thoughts while
> > > trying to find a point in the master branch history that doesn't crash
> > > all the time :)
> > >
> > > Cheers
> > >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
> > Post to     : kicad-developers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
> > More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
>
>
>
> --
> /Jonatan
> http://kymatica.com
>
> _______________________________________________
> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
> Post to     : kicad-developers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
> More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
>