From: Benjamin R. <ra...@op...> - 2010-02-23 14:18:59
|
On 2/23/10 9:00 AM, Alejandro Galue wrote: > 1. We should always work on a branch of stable/1.6 (for 1.6.x) or > master (for 1.7.x), and only merge changes from the new branch after > bamboo said that all is ok; Am I right? Yes and no. It's fine to do quick fixes and such to the branches directly, but we won't release (or tag a new "snapshot") until the branch is green in bamboo. > 2. Work directly on 1.7 and/or 1.6-testing won't be allowed; Am I right? 1.7 and 1.6-testing will go away, they're kind of obsolete, since you don't need to push to the upstream 1.6 or master branches in an unfinished state. You can either push to a branch if you want other people to try out your code while you're working on it, or once it's done, just push it to 1.6 or master. If you're working on a big feature, than we'd prefer the bamboo+branch route just for the sake of making it safer for the end-users, but part of the reason to move to this more git-friendly way of development is so we don't all have to spend so much time managing getting things back and forth between "real" and "blessed" branches. > 3. Is there any naming convention for branches? How can I recognize it in bamboo? Not really, although it would be a good idea. :) I've been using: jira/xxx bugzilla/xxx ...for things that have an associated task or bug. For features, we've just been doing 'feature-whatever' just like we did in svn. > For bug fixing, I think that it will be useful that the patch > includes a JUnit test as a probe that the problem has been solved. > > Maybe use a special name for this JUnit test will not hurt; something > like: > > void testBug12345() { } Sounds good to me. -- Benjamin Reed The OpenNMS Group http://www.opennms.org/ |