From: Linus Arver <linusa@google.com>
To: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>,
Linus Arver via GitGitGadget <gitgitgadget@gmail.com>
Cc: git@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 5/5] SubmittingPatches: simplify guidance for choosing a starting point
Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2023 18:36:18 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <owlyy1j3fo8d.fsf@fine.c.googlers.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <xmqq5y6mpfhm.fsf@gitster.g>
Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> writes:
> "Linus Arver via GitGitGadget" <gitgitgadget@gmail.com> writes:
>
>> +There is one guiding principle for choosing the right starting point: in
>> +general, always base your work on the oldest integration branch that
>> +your change is relevant to (see "Merge upwards" in
>> +linkgit:gitworkflows[7]). What this principle means is that for the
>> +vast majority of cases, the starting point for new work should be the
>> +latest HEAD commit of `maint` or `master` based on the following cases:
>> +
>> +* If you are fixing bugs in the released version, use `maint` as the
>> + starting point (which may mean you have to fix things without using
>> + new API features on the cutting edge that recently appeared in
>> + `master` but were not available in the released version).
>
> I think this is technically not optimal, but is good enough for the
> sake of simplicity and brevity[*].
>
> [Footnote]
>
> * An very old but still severe bug in tagged versions would want to
> be fixed ideally not on top of 'maint' but on top of the latest
> tagged version in the same maintenance track. E.g. if the commit
> X introduced the bug, you may ask "git describe --contains X" the
> oldest version the commit appears in, say "v2.30.0-rc2-gXXXXXX".
> Then you would run "git checkout -b fix v2.30.9" to start the
> branch to fix it.
In this example, are we using v2.30.9 as a starting point, not v2.30.0
because v2.30.9 is the latest tagged version that is in 'maint'?
I think this nugget of knowledge should be included in a v3 of this
series. Will update.
>> +* Otherwise (such as if you are adding new features) use `master`.
>> +
>> +This also means that `next` or `seen` are inappropriate starting points
>> +for your work, if you want your work to have a realistic chance of
>> +graduating to `master`. They are simply not designed to provide a
>> +stable base for new work, because they are (by design) frequently
>> +re-integrated with incoming patches on the mailing list and force-pushed
>> +to replace previous versions of these branches.
>
> "unstable" is not the primary reason why you shouldn't build on
> 'next'. It is "your work, if queued on 'next', cannot be merged to
> 'master' without pulling all the other undercooked stuff still in
> 'next'", as you describe in the next paragraph. But that is
> different from being unstable. I'd suggest to use something like
> this instead:
>
> ... not designed to be used as a base for new work---they
> are there only to make sure that topics in flight work well
> together. A topic that is literally built on top of 'next'
> cannot be merged to 'master' without dragging all the other
> topics in 'next', some of which may not be ready. In
> addition, `seen` is frequently re-integrated with incoming
> patches ...
Will update. Thanks.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-07-26 1:36 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 38+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-07-08 1:05 [PATCH 0/5] SubmittingPatches: clarify which branch to use Linus Arver via GitGitGadget
2023-07-08 1:05 ` [PATCH 1/5] SubmittingPatches: reword awkward phrasing Linus Arver via GitGitGadget
2023-07-08 5:37 ` Junio C Hamano
2023-07-08 1:05 ` [PATCH 2/5] SubmittingPatches: be more explicit Linus Arver via GitGitGadget
2023-07-08 5:36 ` Junio C Hamano
2023-07-13 21:03 ` Linus Arver
2023-07-13 21:10 ` Junio C Hamano
2023-07-08 1:05 ` [PATCH 3/5] SubmittingPatches: discuss subsystems separately from git.git Linus Arver via GitGitGadget
2023-07-08 1:05 ` [PATCH 4/5] SubmittingPatches: remove confusing guidance about base branches Linus Arver via GitGitGadget
2023-07-08 5:48 ` Junio C Hamano
2023-07-13 21:54 ` Linus Arver
2023-07-08 1:05 ` [PATCH 5/5] SubmittingPatches: define topic branches Linus Arver via GitGitGadget
2023-07-14 6:01 ` [PATCH v2 0/5] SubmittingPatches: clarify which branch to use Linus Arver via GitGitGadget
2023-07-14 6:01 ` [PATCH v2 1/5] SubmittingPatches: reword awkward phrasing Linus Arver via GitGitGadget
2023-07-14 6:01 ` [PATCH v2 2/5] SubmittingPatches: discuss subsystems separately from git.git Linus Arver via GitGitGadget
2023-07-14 6:01 ` [PATCH v2 3/5] SubmittingPatches: de-emphasize branches as starting points Linus Arver via GitGitGadget
2023-07-14 6:01 ` [PATCH v2 4/5] SubmittingPatches: emphasize need to communicate non-default " Linus Arver via GitGitGadget
2023-07-14 6:01 ` [PATCH v2 5/5] SubmittingPatches: simplify guidance for choosing a starting point Linus Arver via GitGitGadget
2023-07-14 17:31 ` Junio C Hamano
2023-07-26 1:36 ` Linus Arver [this message]
2023-07-26 2:31 ` Linus Arver
2023-07-26 4:41 ` Junio C Hamano
2023-07-26 3:04 ` [PATCH v3 0/5] SubmittingPatches: clarify which branch to use Linus Arver via GitGitGadget
2023-07-26 3:04 ` [PATCH v3 1/5] SubmittingPatches: reword awkward phrasing Linus Arver via GitGitGadget
2023-07-26 3:04 ` [PATCH v3 2/5] SubmittingPatches: discuss subsystems separately from git.git Linus Arver via GitGitGadget
2023-07-26 3:04 ` [PATCH v3 3/5] SubmittingPatches: de-emphasize branches as starting points Linus Arver via GitGitGadget
2023-07-26 3:05 ` [PATCH v3 4/5] SubmittingPatches: emphasize need to communicate non-default " Linus Arver via GitGitGadget
2023-07-26 3:05 ` [PATCH v3 5/5] SubmittingPatches: simplify guidance for choosing a starting point Linus Arver via GitGitGadget
2023-07-26 5:15 ` [PATCH v3 0/5] SubmittingPatches: clarify which branch to use Junio C Hamano
2023-07-26 17:19 ` Linus Arver
2023-07-26 5:16 ` [PATCH v3 6/5] SubmittingPatches: choice of base for fixing an older maintenance track Junio C Hamano
2023-07-26 5:40 ` Eric Sunshine
2023-07-26 16:36 ` Junio C Hamano
2023-07-26 5:17 ` [PATCH 7/5] SubmittingPatches: explain why 'next' and above are inappropriate base Junio C Hamano
2023-07-27 19:26 ` Linus Arver
2023-07-26 5:21 ` [PATCH 8/5] SubmittingPatches: use of older maintenance tracks is an exception Junio C Hamano
2023-07-27 19:35 ` Linus Arver
2023-07-27 20:08 ` Junio C Hamano
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=owlyy1j3fo8d.fsf@fine.c.googlers.com \
--to=linusa@google.com \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=gitgitgadget@gmail.com \
--cc=gitster@pobox.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).