From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Adam Monsen Subject: release maintenance vs. release engineering (was: configuring cherry-pick to always use -x?) Date: Tue, 15 Feb 2011 13:03:43 -0800 Message-ID: <4D5AEA2F.9000606@gmail.com> References: <4D596435.9020605@gmail.com> <4D59A39C.9090402@gmail.com> <4D5A401B.1050103@drmicha.warpmail.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Junio C Hamano , git@vger.kernel.org To: Michael J Gruber X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Tue Feb 15 22:03:56 2011 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.180.67]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1PpS3u-0000oQ-KH for gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org; Tue, 15 Feb 2011 22:03:55 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754263Ab1BOVDu (ORCPT ); Tue, 15 Feb 2011 16:03:50 -0500 Received: from mail-pv0-f174.google.com ([74.125.83.174]:48523 "EHLO mail-pv0-f174.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751241Ab1BOVDs (ORCPT ); Tue, 15 Feb 2011 16:03:48 -0500 Received: by pva4 with SMTP id 4so86955pva.19 for ; Tue, 15 Feb 2011 13:03:48 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to :cc:subject:references:in-reply-to:x-enigmail-version:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=QbsGnl9VpzYgT0f1x3vfOTuysLh17+pxRhiHYDVIlGg=; b=HHqd0pM/XzsQXPIuFxLTDcwHJcSLMUzlR6f+eKU3CQ1Rexry9NSZ4L0YAHp9edSnxn qt1zDJ6ka5yMN7QbLqqSbCFoEeGGaWe9wfkDxHKlZjn9bZpi2iaU73BH/7y0rCrEnqxb j7dwSuIarAhc3gmULdipiocNBXa1A0oJeOnkc= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject :references:in-reply-to:x-enigmail-version:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; b=c7JWKy0niQ++xGi8JgImWlY8BCIVi9Jwm6QDqLpex+lF3XBEKdd4iag1Gx94XcGPyB MIpxZx8AOTNDC3zK6ZI7Hf5h8RrY6SXWmIdaWWPLfBJQdl/tibL1oEf6v/xFpudIVRCt l6hZqriDk2s4kFbjqNE94kVKHu9tSyDTzlQgQ= Received: by 10.142.147.13 with SMTP id u13mr4613474wfd.108.1297803828226; Tue, 15 Feb 2011 13:03:48 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.13.8] (c-67-183-136-182.hsd1.wa.comcast.net [67.183.136.182]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id v19sm6187975wfh.12.2011.02.15.13.03.47 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Tue, 15 Feb 2011 13:03:47 -0800 (PST) User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686 (x86_64); en-US; rv:1.9.2.13) Gecko/20101207 Lightning/1.0b2 Thunderbird/3.1.7 In-Reply-To: <4D5A401B.1050103@drmicha.warpmail.net> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.1.1 Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Michael J Gruber wrote: > I don't quite understand how cherry picks could conflict less then > merges if the release branch contains fixes only. The last time I experienced a painful merge from f-release to master, it was because some files had been culled from master but left extant on f-release. Not too hard to resolve, actually. But I really only needed one change pulled into master, and when I cherry picked instead of merging the whole branch, there were no conflicts, and master ended up containing exactly what I wanted. > My impression is that "f-release" actually > mixes release engineering and maintenance. Two possible remedies: > > - Separate release engineering from maintenance and merge only the > latter to master Ah, thank you! This is invaluable advice. I think I'll go with this option since mixing release engineering and maintenance is exactly what I'm doing. Hopefully it's worth the added complexity of having another public branch. I pushed an example to https://github.com/meonkeys/releaseBranchDemo that I'll share with my developers. "git merge -sours" will definitely be something useful to add to the quiver too.