RE: Workflow for templates?

["Pyeron, Jason J CTR (US)" <jason.j.pyeron.ctr@mail.mil>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3325 bytes --]

Maybe I lost sight of your problem. Can you give a specific example of where "it" does not work?

> -----Original Message-----
> From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org [mailto:git-owner@vger.kernel.org] On
> Behalf Of Josef Wolf
> Sent: Tuesday, November 06, 2012 2:51 PM
> To: git@vger.kernel.org
> Subject: Re: Workflow for templates?
> 
> No suggestions on this one?
> 
> On Wed, Oct 31, 2012 at 11:44:04AM +0100, Josef Wolf wrote:
> > I am somewhat unsure whether it would work this way. After all, there
> seems to
> > be an unbreakable rule with git: never rebase published branches.
> >
> > Thus, once I have published my work to other people who also need to
> work on
> > the same localizations as I do, I have no longer the option of
> rebasing to get
> > rid of the localizations and put the generic template stuff for
> upstream.
> >
> > I guess, my concern is because I have not yet fully understood the
> problems of
> > rebasing, and how to recover from them.
> >
> > Maybe I should try to explain the problem in terms of repository
> > hierarchy. Let's assume, there is this hierarchy of repositories:
> >
> > upstream: central repository, containing the generic template
> >
> > foo-site: repository for site foo. Here we have localizations for a
> specific
> >           administrative entity named foo (say, google).
> >           This is where clones for production are made from, and
> production
> >           boxes pull from here to be kept up-to-date.
> >
> > foo-prodA: A clone of foo-site, put in production and pulling from a
> specific
> >            branch on foo-site to receive released, blessed updates.
> > foo-prodB: Similar to foo-prodA, but on another box.
> >
> > foo-devA: A clone of foo-site to make development, releases, and
> whatever for
> >           foo.
> > foo-devB: One more clone of foo-site, Developer B is working here.
> >
> > Then, we might have more administrative entities: bar-site, bar-
> prodA,
> > bar-prodB, bar-devA, bar-devB, for example. This might be Microsoft,
> for
> > example.
> >
> > Further, foo-devA might be the same person as bar-devA.
> >
> > So when foo-devA pulls from foo-devB, then foo-devB will create
> problems when
> > he rebases after that pull.
> >
> > I think I have some kind of misunderstanding here, but I just can't
> figure
> > what it is.
> >
> >
> > Maybe I should try to explain the problem in yet other words:
> >
> > What I am trying to achieve, is to extend the workflow from
> development to
> > deployment across multiple administrative entities. As a picture:
> >
> >   upstream     (templates only).
> >      ^
> >      |
> >      v
> >   development  (configured, might contain experimental changes)
> >      ^
> >      |
> >      v
> >   deployment   (configured)
> >
> > This workflow should not stop at administrative borders. Just replace
> foo by
> > google and bar by Microsoft to get an idea of what I am trying to
> achieve.
> > --
> > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
> > the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> > More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

[-- Attachment #2: smime.p7s --]
[-- Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature, Size: 5615 bytes --]