new branching model #2156
new branching model #2156
Conversation
enkore
force-pushed
the
f/devmodel
branch
2 times, most recently
from
e60313b
to
d2c6918
Compare
docs/development.rst
Outdated
| 3. Cherry pick and backport the changes from each labelled PR, remove | ||
| the label for each PR you've backported. | ||
| 4. Make a PR of the backporting branch against the maintenance branch | ||
| for backport review |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
add some dots at the end of sentences. first item: remove parens?
docs/development.rst
Outdated
| Previously (until release 1.0.10) Borg used a back-merging model where | ||
| most minor changes and fixes where committed to a maintenance branch | ||
| (eg. 1.0-maint), and the maintenance branch(es) were regularly merged | ||
| back into the main development branch. This became more and more |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
is this really called back-merging? I'ld call it forward-merging. :)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
"merging upwards" according to gitworkflows(7)
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #2156 +/- ##
==========================================
- Coverage 83.39% 82.43% -0.96%
==========================================
Files 20 20
Lines 7186 7107 -79
Branches 1227 1223 -4
==========================================
- Hits 5993 5859 -134
- Misses 861 915 +54
- Partials 332 333 +1
Continue to review full report at Codecov.
|
docs/development.rst
Outdated
|
|
||
| Borg development happens on the ``master`` branch and uses GitHub pull | ||
| requests (if you don't have GitHub or don't want to use it you can | ||
| send smaller patches via email to one of the maintainers, see AUTHORS). |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
... via the borgbackup mailing list to the maintainers).
docs/development.rst
Outdated
| 3. Cherry pick and backport the changes from each labelled PR, remove | ||
| the label for each PR you've backported. | ||
| 4. Make a PR of the backporting branch against the maintenance branch | ||
| for backport review. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think we want some kind of comment in the original PR too. Maybe just reference the backported PR from the backporting branch PR, so github automatically places that comment?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yeah, that makes it easier to see when-what-who happened
Fixes #2155
(When we have multiple backport labels we can just make them all the same colour, no real need for colour coding there, and keeps colours free [all 17 million of them :D])