Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Determine branching/release strategy for this repo #41

Closed
eloquence opened this issue May 6, 2020 · 4 comments · Fixed by #52
Closed

Determine branching/release strategy for this repo #41

eloquence opened this issue May 6, 2020 · 4 comments · Fixed by #52

Comments

@eloquence
Copy link
Member

As noted on on #35 (comment) we should decide on how we want to merge/release docs changes, now that we have limited production usage of SecureDrop Workstation. (There's potential for confusion and errors if we deploy docs updates for changes that have not landed in a production release yet.)

For example, we could set up a develop branch similar to SecureDrop Core, and use that as a staging ground for all changes -- with some trickling to master immediately, and others held back until the applicable release is live.

Let's aim to build consensus on this ticket for the preferred approach and then document and implement it.

@zenmonkeykstop
Copy link
Contributor

Drawing on lessons from docs.securedrop.org, maybe

  • have a develop branch that maps to latest as suggested,
  • create release tags for versions of the docs considered stable, which RTD will then pick up on, and
  • only have latest and stable active in RTD?

@eloquence
Copy link
Member Author

eloquence commented May 7, 2020

Can you expand on your proposal a bit, Kev? If I'm imagining the use of a tag in a single develop branch that would identify the stable release, it's not clear to me how we would solve for this case:

2020-05-07 52f8ea8f - urgent commit for prod  <-- tagging this would pull in previous commits for dev
2020-05-05 d402454a - commit for dev
2020-05-03 703bc9eb - commit for dev

For example, it seems like if we merged the copy & paste change in #33, we'd be forced to back out that change to tag an urgent prod update. Or am I misunderstanding something?

@eloquence
Copy link
Member Author

I'm OK with trying a tag-based approach for now; the occasional case of having to back out changes may outweigh the cost of having to perpetually maintain two branches here.

@eloquence
Copy link
Member Author

There's now a stable tag, and the docs are set to load it by default. We'll have to advance that tag whenever we make changes that are applicable to the current production release. latest should continue to build from master. Leaving this issue open until we've had at least a couple of days to test drive this setup.

I use annotated tags signed with my FPF key for the current stable tag.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

2 participants