[yt-dev] Branches post 3.0

[Matthew Turk]

On Wed, Jul 23, 2014 at 5:02 PM, Cameron Hummels <chummels at gmail.com> wrote:
> +1
>
> so `stable` will be locked at a given bookmark/changeset, whereas `yt` will
> from then on be the development branch?
>

Sort of.  Stable is a named branch, so we'll merge into it periodically.

>
> On Wed, Jul 23, 2014 at 2:59 PM, Britton Smith <brittonsmith at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>>
>> +1
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Jul 23, 2014 at 10:59 PM, Nathan Goldbaum <nathan12343 at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Wed, Jul 23, 2014 at 2:57 PM, Matthew Turk <matthewturk at gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Alright, so it seems like there's a bit of a broad consensus on making
>>>> "stable" mean 3.0.  I think my reluctance may just be related to
>>>> anxiety about breakage.  But, let's push through it.
>>>>
>>>> So, when we release, how about this?
>>>>
>>>> yt-3.0 => deprecated, not closed.  Eventually, we will close.
>>>> yt => this will be merged *into* from yt-3.0
>>>> stable => this will be merged *into* from yt, post-3.0 merge (i.e., it
>>>> will be 3.0)
>>>> yt-2.x => this will be a new branch that starts at the current "stable"
>>>> tip.
>>>>
>>>> How's that sound?
>>>
>>>
>>> +1
>>>
>>> http://i.imgur.com/vwMin.gif
>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, Jul 23, 2014 at 1:01 PM, Sam Skillman <samskillman at gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>> > Also late to the discussion, but have been following along.  I think I
>>>> > like
>>>> > Britton's suggestion here. Named yt-2 branch will allow it exist in
>>>> > history
>>>> > and if for some reason additional development is done on it, there is
>>>> > an
>>>> > obvious path forward. I also agree that when yt-3.0 is released it
>>>> > should be
>>>> > merged into yt and stable.
>>>> >
>>>> > Sam
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> > On Wed, Jul 23, 2014 at 10:54 AM, Britton Smith
>>>> > <brittonsmith at gmail.com>
>>>> > wrote:
>>>> >>
>>>> >> Hi everyone,
>>>> >>
>>>> >> I'm late to the discussion, but here's my opinion:
>>>> >>
>>>> >> 1. yt-x.2 should become a named branch (maybe just "yt-2").
>>>> >> 2. yt-3.0 goes into "yt" and "stable" at the time of the release.
>>>> >> Further
>>>> >> development happens in "yt" just as it used to.
>>>> >> 3. yt-3.0 the branch closes as soon as is feasible.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> I don't like names like "legacy", "modern", etc that do not really
>>>> >> describe what it is.  yt-2.x may get one or more final point releases
>>>> >> and/or
>>>> >> bugfixes that will need a home and I think it's worthwhile that
>>>> >> yt-2.x live
>>>> >> some place visible.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> The "stable" branch should always stand for "if you don't know what
>>>> >> you
>>>> >> want, you want this" which to me is the latest trusted release, or
>>>> >> the thing
>>>> >> you want people starting on.  Once yt-3.0 is released, that should be
>>>> >> yt-3.0.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> Britton
>>>> >>
>>>> >> On Wed, Jul 23, 2014 at 6:32 PM, Nathan Goldbaum
>>>> >> <nathan12343 at gmail.com>
>>>> >> wrote:
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> On Wed, Jul 23, 2014 at 10:26 AM, Matthew Turk
>>>> >>> <matthewturk at gmail.com>
>>>> >>> wrote:
>>>> >>>>
>>>> >>>> On Wed, Jul 23, 2014 at 12:07 PM, Nathan Goldbaum
>>>> >>>> <nathan12343 at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> >>>> >
>>>> >>>> >
>>>> >>>> >
>>>> >>>> > On Wed, Jul 23, 2014 at 4:18 AM, Matthew Turk
>>>> >>>> > <matthewturk at gmail.com>
>>>> >>>> > wrote:
>>>> >>>> >>
>>>> >>>> >> Hi everyone,
>>>> >>>> >>
>>>> >>>> >> Yesterday during the doc sprint, the question of what to do
>>>> >>>> >> about
>>>> >>>> >> branches post-3.0 came up.  Currently there are three branches,
>>>> >>>> >> which
>>>> >>>> >> correspond to different names on the front page of the yt
>>>> >>>> >> homepage.
>>>> >>>> >>
>>>> >>>> >>  * Stable => The branch into which bug fixes are merged, but not
>>>> >>>> >> a
>>>> >>>> >> lot
>>>> >>>> >> of active development occurs.
>>>> >>>> >>  * yt => The 2.x development branch, which has slowed almost to
>>>> >>>> >> a
>>>> >>>> >> halt
>>>> >>>> >>  * yt-3.0 => The 3.0 development branch
>>>> >>>> >>
>>>> >>>> >> It seems there is broad consensus that after the release, the
>>>> >>>> >> yt-3.0
>>>> >>>> >> branch would be merged into the yt branch.  (I would like to
>>>> >>>> >> hold off
>>>> >>>> >> on "closing" the yt-3.0 branch for a while, however.)
>>>> >>>> >
>>>> >>>> >
>>>> >>>> > Why is that?
>>>> >>>> >
>>>> >>>>
>>>> >>>> Because until we get to the point that every developer has issued
>>>> >>>> PRs
>>>> >>>> for all of their yt-3.0 development, we're going to have multiple
>>>> >>>> instances of "closing yt-3.0".  Because it's decentralized, we
>>>> >>>> can't
>>>> >>>> force all, everywhere, to be closed.
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> Ah, of course that makes sense.  I guess we'll need to have two open
>>>> >>> development branches and merge from the yt-3.0 branch into the yt
>>>> >>> branch
>>>> >>> regularly.
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>>>
>>>> >>>>
>>>> >>>> >>
>>>> >>>> >> But, what is
>>>> >>>> >> then to be done about the "stable" branch?  My thought was:
>>>> >>>> >>
>>>> >>>> >>  * stable => will be on 2.x for at least one release, until 3.1
>>>> >>>> >>  * yt => 3.0
>>>> >>>> >>  * yt-3.0 => we try to migrate development onto the yt branch,
>>>> >>>> >> which
>>>> >>>> >> is 3.0, but don't force yet
>>>> >>>> >
>>>> >>>> >
>>>> >>>> > I'd be -1 on having bugfixes for 3.0 on two branches.
>>>> >>>> >
>>>> >>>> >>
>>>> >>>> >>
>>>> >>>> >> The alternate idea was:
>>>> >>>> >>
>>>> >>>> >>  * stable => 3.0
>>>> >>>> >>  * yt => 3.0
>>>> >>>> >>  * yt-3.0 => closed
>>>> >>>> >>
>>>> >>>> >
>>>> >>>> > I'd prefer this, possibly with another named branch named
>>>> >>>> > "legacy"
>>>> >>>> > that
>>>> >>>> > contains 2.x.
>>>> >>>> >
>>>> >>>> >>
>>>> >>>> >> I think we need a longer migration time for 2.x, though.  I will
>>>> >>>> >> update YTEP-0008 with whatever we come up with, but is there a
>>>> >>>> >> strong
>>>> >>>> >> opinion for either of these options?  Option 1: stable stays 2.x
>>>> >>>> >> for
>>>> >>>> >> now, Option 2, stable becomes 3.0.
>>>> >>>> >>
>>>> >>>> >> -Matt
>>>> >>>> >> _______________________________________________
>>>> >>>> >> yt-dev mailing list
>>>> >>>> >> yt-dev at lists.spacepope.org
>>>> >>>> >> http://lists.spacepope.org/listinfo.cgi/yt-dev-spacepope.org
>>>> >>>> >
>>>> >>>> >
>>>> >>>> >
>>>> >>>> > _______________________________________________
>>>> >>>> > yt-dev mailing list
>>>> >>>> > yt-dev at lists.spacepope.org
>>>> >>>> > http://lists.spacepope.org/listinfo.cgi/yt-dev-spacepope.org
>>>> >>>> >
>>>> >>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> >>>> yt-dev mailing list
>>>> >>>> yt-dev at lists.spacepope.org
>>>> >>>> http://lists.spacepope.org/listinfo.cgi/yt-dev-spacepope.org
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> _______________________________________________
>>>> >>> yt-dev mailing list
>>>> >>> yt-dev at lists.spacepope.org
>>>> >>> http://lists.spacepope.org/listinfo.cgi/yt-dev-spacepope.org
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>
>>>> >>
>>>> >> _______________________________________________
>>>> >> yt-dev mailing list
>>>> >> yt-dev at lists.spacepope.org
>>>> >> http://lists.spacepope.org/listinfo.cgi/yt-dev-spacepope.org
>>>> >>
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> > _______________________________________________
>>>> > yt-dev mailing list
>>>> > yt-dev at lists.spacepope.org
>>>> > http://lists.spacepope.org/listinfo.cgi/yt-dev-spacepope.org
>>>> >
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> yt-dev mailing list
>>>> yt-dev at lists.spacepope.org
>>>> http://lists.spacepope.org/listinfo.cgi/yt-dev-spacepope.org
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> yt-dev mailing list
>>> yt-dev at lists.spacepope.org
>>> http://lists.spacepope.org/listinfo.cgi/yt-dev-spacepope.org
>>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> yt-dev mailing list
>> yt-dev at lists.spacepope.org
>> http://lists.spacepope.org/listinfo.cgi/yt-dev-spacepope.org
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Cameron Hummels
> Postdoctoral Researcher
> Steward Observatory
> University of Arizona
> http://chummels.org
>
> _______________________________________________
> yt-dev mailing list
> yt-dev at lists.spacepope.org
> http://lists.spacepope.org/listinfo.cgi/yt-dev-spacepope.org
>