Re: What's cooking in git.git (Nov 2012, #02; Fri, 9)

From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Date: Nov 10, 2012, 17:14 UTC
Message-ID: <7vhaoxpehx.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org>
In-Reply-To: <20121110003850.GB12567@sigill.intra.peff.net>

Jeff King <peff@peff.net> writes:

Show 14 quoted lines

> On Fri, Nov 09, 2012 at 12:27:35PM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>
>> What we should have arranged was to have https://github.com/git/git
>> (which is not even owned by me, but I asked somebody at GitHub to
>> assign me a write privilege) writable by the interim maintainer, so
>> that normal people would keep pulling from there, while the interim
>> maintainer can choose to publish broken-out branches to his
>> repository.
>
> Yes, I have write access to that repository, too, but I intentionally
> held off from updating it out of a sense of nervousness. I figured if I
> screwed up anything too badly, people who were clued-in enough to switch
> to pulling from my repository would be clued-in enough to rebase across
> any too-horrible mistake I made. ;)

That "nervousness" reminds me of myself when I took over. Before I could ask for a few weeks of practice period, Linus arranged to have folks at k.org to chown the authoritative location to me, declaring "no practice period; it's already done and it's all yours".

And I made at least one mistake pushing 'master' with one commit rewound too much (corrected by pushing an extra merge). Luckily, the world did not end ;-).

> I think if we do this again, I will make the same split you do (git/git
> for integration branches, peff/git as a mirror of my private repo).

I am fairly sure I'll have to ask you (or somebody else) again next year around late September.

Show 5 quoted lines

>> And it is not too late to do so; from the look of your "What's
>> cooking", you are doing pretty well ;-).
>
> Any fool can merge topics to master. The real test will be how many
> regressions people report in the next two weeks. :)

I agree that the actual merging to 'master' is mechanical with the procedure built around Meta/Reintegrate. Important decisions are made before you merge a topic to 'next' and mark topics as "Will merge to 'master'." My comment was about that, and your responses to the list messages.

Show 6 quoted lines

> By the way, I did not touch 'maint' at all while you were gone. I don't
> know what your usual method is for keeping track of maint-worthy topics
> after they have gone to master. The usual "what's cooking" workflow
> keeps track of things going to master, but no more; I'd guess you
> probably just merge to maint when you delete them from last cycle's
> "graduated to master" list.

That is done by eyeballing output from Meta/GRADUATED (which spits out something that could be fed to shell, but I do not fully trust its logic, and always eyeball them before I prepare the temporary file to feed Meta/Reintegrate to update 'maint').