openstack team mailing list archive

[corvus@xxxxxxxxxxxx (James E. Blair)]

Mark McLoughlin <markmc@xxxxxxxxxx> writes:

> On Fri, 2011-11-11 at 12:11 +0400, Yuriy Taraday wrote:
>> I wonder if we should keep Change ID consistent in stable and master
>> branches so that if one merged something into master, reviewers
>> and archaeologists can easily find both related changes in master and all
>> backports of specific change.
>> 
>> The simple scenario is: push change into master, then cherry-pick it on top
>> of stable branch(es). Change-Id will be the same, Gerrit will allow one to
>> find all such backports by clicking on Change-Id.
>
> If gerrit can handle it, that would be great. But I'm not sure it does

It does work as Yuriy described, and seems to be in keeping with gerrit
philosophy.  Maybe we should update the wiki to incorporate that.

Here's an example: 

https://review-dev.openstack.org/#q,I1729eb6fb7027808650bae9a87b2d95cc5c5a0f7,n,z

> In the mean time, we make sure that all commits to the stable branch
> include "cherry picked from XXXXX" in the commit message to help
> tracking.
>
> Also, I'm experimenting with using git-notes to keep track of e.g. why
> patches on master weren't cherry-picked into stable:
>
>   http://wiki.openstack.org/StableBranch#Keeping_Notes

Why not (also) leave review comments to that effect in gerrit?  If you
started them out with something like "Reviewed for stable inclusion",
they'd be easy to spot when scanning the collapsed comments.

-Jim