On Thu, Oct 19, 2017 at 10:04 PM, Johan Corveleyn <jcorvel_at_gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 5, 2017 at 11:42 PM, Branko Čibej <brane_at_apache.org> wrote:
>> On 05.10.2017 22:36, Johan Corveleyn wrote:
>>> On Thu, Oct 5, 2017 at 12:30 PM, Daniel Shahaf <d.s_at_daniel.shahaf.name> wrote:
>>>> Devil's advocate hat on, and in light of Brane's sibling reply, let me
>>>> describe how an svnmucc workflow might work.
>>> Thanks, but I prefer the merge workflow. It seems more natural to me,
>>> and I think it's more likely to be used by other svn users out there,
>>> in case they have such a workflow. So it seems like the more
>>> interesting dog food to me :-).
>>> I'm not very good at writing down an accurate procedure, but I still
>>> think it should be something like I wrote in my first mail in this
>>>> 1) Commit to staging. Other devs get the commit mail via the
>>>> notifications@ list.
>>>> 2) Wait for others to review (the commit mail is the notification that
>>>> something needs to be reviewed). In case of large or sensitive
>>>> changes, preferably send a mail to dev@ to draw extra attention.
>>>> 3) If any other committer says +1, go ahead and "promote" (merge) to
>>>> the live site.
>>>> 4) If no response after 1 week? 3 days? ...? go ahead and promote to
>>>> live site (lazy consensus).
>>> As Brane suggested, let's do everything in this direction (test on
>>> staging first, then merge to publish), except for security
>>> And as Daniel suggested, let's serve the staging site via
>>> https://subversion-staging.apache.org/ (I'd say we ask infra to set
>>> this up for us).
>> Sounds like a plan.
>> -- Brane
> Sorry, I dropped this on the floor trying to catch some other things.
> I'll try to pick up the pieces now :-) ...
> svn cp $URL/site/publish $URL/site/staging
> open infra ticket for serving /site/staging on subversion-staging.a.o
> put a short description of our desired workflow in /site/README
Done. The infra ticket is here:
The description of the workflow in site/README is more or less
copy-pasted from this mail thread. Can probably be improved ...
(anyone: feel free). While writing it down, I realized that this
"promote from staging to publish with complete merges" isn't
parallellizable (if two committers want to make two distinct changes,
and not merge all of it in one go to publish). Oh well, it's a start.
Received on 2017-10-19 23:59:01 CEST