DPDK patches and discussions
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Matthew Hall <mhall@mhcomputing.net>
To: Thomas Monjalon <thomas.monjalon@6wind.com>,
	Marc Sune <marc.sune@bisdn.de>
Cc: dev@dpdk.org
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] development/integration branch?
Date: Wed, 22 Oct 2014 00:00:58 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20141022070058.GA6051@mhcomputing.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <3074245.k7N1CrtUjD@xps13>

On Tue, Oct 21, 2014 at 11:28:47AM +0200, Thomas Monjalon wrote:
> But I care about the message brought by such change. It would mean that
> we can break the development branch and that most of developers don't test
> it nor base their patches on the latest commit. It's all about simple rules
> and messages.

I have seen two common ways to do this which I think are about equal.

1) master is latest release in production, develop branch is tip

2) master is tip, production releases live in branches / tags

A lot of non-free stuff uses (1) along with some open source.

So the DPDK is using model (2), which is pretty common for open source.

What I think git in general and DPDK in particular are missing is, they have a 
tradition tags for releases, however I think this is broken because you can't 
easily append more stuff to tages.

I really prefer putting my releases on actual branches to make it as easy as 
possible for users / maintenance programmers to follow and/or add stuff to a 
codeline. For example I'd like a 1.7.X branch I could follow for my app until 
1.8.X is ready.

Having a stable branch would also make stuff easier for guys like Marc who 
want to follow the known-stable release in an easy way without horsing around 
with "the latest tag of the day" all the time.

Perhaps this is an OK option?


  parent reply	other threads:[~2014-10-22  6:53 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2014-10-21  8:22 Marc Sune
2014-10-21  8:36 ` Richardson, Bruce
2014-10-21  8:46   ` Thomas Monjalon
2014-10-21  9:14     ` Marc Sune
2014-10-21  9:28       ` Thomas Monjalon
2014-10-21  9:38         ` Marc Sune
2014-10-21 13:50           ` Neil Horman
2014-10-22  7:00         ` Matthew Hall [this message]
2014-10-22 13:43           ` Stephen Hemminger
2014-10-22 15:54             ` Matthew Hall
2014-10-21 13:01       ` Stephen Hemminger
2014-10-23  9:19         ` Marc Sune

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20141022070058.GA6051@mhcomputing.net \
    --to=mhall@mhcomputing.net \
    --cc=dev@dpdk.org \
    --cc=marc.sune@bisdn.de \
    --cc=thomas.monjalon@6wind.com \


* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).