[Qemu-devel] branch and tag names

[Qemu-devel] branch and tag names

[Avi Kivity]

Currently, tags and branch names carry their cvs heritage:

  release_0_10_0
  stable_0_10

These are unsightly.  Can we move to

  v0.10.0
  stable/0.10

or even

  0.10.0
  0.10

(odd number of dots = branch, even number of dots = release)?

-- 
Do not meddle in the internals of kernels, for they are subtle and quick to panic.

Re: [Qemu-devel] branch and tag names

[Anthony Liguori]

Avi Kivity wrote:
> Currently, tags and branch names carry their cvs heritage:
>
>  release_0_10_0
>  stable_0_10

And I even renamed them to make them less unslightly :-)  They were 
something like svn/tags/release_0_10_0.

> These are unsightly.  Can we move to
>
>  v0.10.0
>  stable/0.10

v0.10.0 as a tag looks good to me.

stable/0.10 feels a little awkward.  I never have gotten quite used to 
this style of tagging (using file-like hierarchies).

I'm not super opinionated about it either way.  I'm interested to see 
what other people think.

Regards,

Anthony Liguori

Re: [Qemu-devel] branch and tag names

[M. Warner Losh]

In message: <49F4BAB7.3010501@codemonkey.ws>
            Anthony Liguori <anthony@codemonkey.ws> writes:
: Avi Kivity wrote:
: > Currently, tags and branch names carry their cvs heritage:
: >
: >  release_0_10_0
: >  stable_0_10
: 
: And I even renamed them to make them less unslightly :-)  They were 
: something like svn/tags/release_0_10_0.
: 
: > These are unsightly.  Can we move to
: >
: >  v0.10.0
: >  stable/0.10
: 
: v0.10.0 as a tag looks good to me.
: 
: stable/0.10 feels a little awkward.  I never have gotten quite used to 
: this style of tagging (using file-like hierarchies).
: 
: I'm not super opinionated about it either way.  I'm interested to see 
: what other people think.

stable/0.10 matches what many other projects do in this respect.  In
fact, others do it in svn too rather than the really long names that
we used to have here.

But this is just a report on what's done elsewhere.  I too am only
mildly interested in the names here...

Warner

Re: [Qemu-devel] branch and tag names

[Andreas Färber]

Am 26.04.2009 um 21:49 schrieb Anthony Liguori:

> Avi Kivity wrote:
>> Can we move to
>>
>> v0.10.0
>> stable/0.10
>
> v0.10.0 as a tag looks good to me.
>
> stable/0.10 feels a little awkward.  I never have gotten quite used  
> to this style of tagging (using file-like hierarchies).
>
> I'm not super opinionated about it either way.  I'm interested to  
> see what other people think.

+1 for v0.10.2

I don't see the point of having stable/0.10 though. Why do we need  
multiple stable? stable will be branched as v0.10.x, then after the  
last 0.10.x release, stable can be hard-reset to master and branched  
as v0.11.x when ready, and so on.

Btw, any plans of doing a pick-up branch now?

Andreas

Re: [Qemu-devel] branch and tag names

[M. Warner Losh]

In message: <8B2E6405-6772-474F-9B8F-DB1A1689CA2D@web.de>
            Andreas_Färber <andreas.faerber@web.de> writes:
: 
: Am 26.04.2009 um 21:49 schrieb Anthony Liguori:
: 
: > Avi Kivity wrote:
: >> Can we move to
: >>
: >> v0.10.0
: >> stable/0.10
: >
: > v0.10.0 as a tag looks good to me.
: >
: > stable/0.10 feels a little awkward.  I never have gotten quite used  
: > to this style of tagging (using file-like hierarchies).
: >
: > I'm not super opinionated about it either way.  I'm interested to  
: > see what other people think.
: 
: +1 for v0.10.2
: 
: I don't see the point of having stable/0.10 though. Why do we need  
: multiple stable? stable will be branched as v0.10.x, then after the  
: last 0.10.x release, stable can be hard-reset to master and branched  
: as v0.11.x when ready, and so on.

It allows people to grab the historical branches if they want...

Warner

Re: [Qemu-devel] branch and tag names

[Anthony Liguori]

Andreas Färber wrote:
>
> +1 for v0.10.2
>
> I don't see the point of having stable/0.10 though. Why do we need 
> multiple stable? stable will be branched as v0.10.x, then after the 
> last 0.10.x release, stable can be hard-reset to master and branched 
> as v0.11.x when ready, and so on.
>
> Btw, any plans of doing a pick-up branch now?

My current plan is to fork a stable/0.11 before the 0.11.0 release.  
We'll do a few release candidates before the final release and then the 
branch will keep living as the stable series.  I'll stop maintaining 
stable/0.10 after 0.11.0 but at that point but if someone else wants to 
maintain it (via periodic git pull requests),  I'm happy to let it live 
for as long as there is an active maintainer.

It's relatively easy too.  It's just a matter of watching what goes into 
stable/0.11 and cherry picking appropriately.  Any stable/0.10 specific 
bugs would have to be handled specially too but those should be very 
rare (hopefully).

I think it really makes most sense for folks that are maintaining 
something based on a stable branch because of a product (like an 
enterprise/lts distro release).  I expect that not every QEMU release 
will have a long lived stable branch but I expect some will.

Of course, we still have some time to figure this all out.  Based on 
0.10.x, I think we need about a month of stabilization for 0.11 so if we 
stick with 6 month releases, I'd expect stable/0.11 to branch out 
sometime in late June/early July.

Regards,

Anthony Liguori
> Andreas
>

Re: [Qemu-devel] branch and tag names

[Avi Kivity]

Anthony Liguori wrote:
>
> stable/0.10 feels a little awkward.  I never have gotten quite used to 
> this style of tagging (using file-like hierarchies).

It's useful if you have multiple categories of branches (personal 
development branches, formal maintenance branches, semi-formal branches 
for early sharing).  Probably not so important for the master repository.

>
> I'm not super opinionated about it either way.

Pity, it's even better bikeshedding material than directory layouts.

-- 
Do not meddle in the internals of kernels, for they are subtle and quick to panic.

Re: [Qemu-devel] branch and tag names

[Avi Kivity]

Andreas Färber wrote:
>
> I don't see the point of having stable/0.10 though. Why do we need 
> multiple stable? stable will be branched as v0.10.x, then after the 
> last 0.10.x release, stable can be hard-reset to master and branched 
> as v0.11.x when ready, and so on.
>

Repurposing branches is evil.  Someone regularly pulls for stable, one 
day it changes to something completely different.  Curses.

-- 
Do not meddle in the internals of kernels, for they are subtle and quick to panic.

Re: [Qemu-devel] branch and tag names

[Andreas Färber]

Am 27.04.2009 um 08:33 schrieb Avi Kivity:

> Andreas Färber wrote:
>>
>> I don't see the point of having stable/0.10 though. Why do we need  
>> multiple stable? stable will be branched as v0.10.x, then after the  
>> last 0.10.x release, stable can be hard-reset to master and  
>> branched as v0.11.x when ready, and so on.
>>
>
> Repurposing branches is evil.  Someone regularly pulls for stable,  
> one day it changes to something completely different.  Curses.

Hm, I was rather thinking of a *user* wanting to have the latest  
stable code. If she works on stable/0.10, the code'll start to bitrot  
some day and she'll have to find out what the name of the newest  
stable branch is.

Git itself has maint, next and master, plus the tagged versions.
http://repo.or.cz/w/git.git
maint would correspond to 0.10.x, next to 0.11.x-to-be.

I would've thought all the unused branches in SVN would stem from the  
enforcement of tagging from a branch and them not being visible to the  
average user from a day-to-day command such as `git branch`.

Andreas