Re: [docbook-tc] Proposal to reorganize branches in the DocBook repository

[Scott Hudson <scott.hudson@servicenow.com>]

Do we have control over the naming? I've seen a lot of discussions in industry lately about changing the names of master/slave, white/blacklist, etc. to be more inclusive/appropriate.

Can we rename "master" to "development" or "current" or something?

If we are moving things around anyways, might be a good time to make such a change...


_____________________________________________
Scott Hudson
Staff, Content Tools and Engineering
docs.servicenow.com <https://docs.servicenow.com/>


ïOn 7/21/20, 12:53 PM, "Norman Tovey-Walsh" <docbook-tc@lists.oasis-open.org on behalf of ndw@nwalsh.com> wrote:

    Hi folks,
    
    Apologies for spamming the list. I donât know how many of you care about
    this. It wonât have any substantive impact on the work products that the
    TC produces so it isnât important that you care (or even have an
    opinion). If âDocBook repositoryâ and âgitâ and âbranchesâ arenât things
    youâre interested in, you can stop reading now and no harm will befall
    you. :-)
    
    The github.com/docbook/docbook repository where we store the schema
    artifacts that are under development is currently organized with
    branches:
    
      master          : Effectively the last published release
      docbook-5.1     : The 5.1 release
      docbookâ5.2-dev : The âdevelopmentâ branch for 5.2
      docbook50-rewind: The 5.0 release (it has an odd name because
                        we failed to tag the 5.0 release and I had
                        to reconstruct it)
      *               : random other feature branches
    
    I probably proposed this organization, but Iâve come to think itâs not
    right. It means that the master branch, which everyone sees, appears
    moribund with no commits for months or years. Itâs also slightly more
    complicated to publish beta releases (and real releases) automatically
    off of different branches every time.
    
    We already have stable branches for the actual releases. I propose that
    we adopt this organization instead:
    
      master          : The current development branch for V.next
      docbookâ5.2     : The 5.2 release (which weâll create when 5.2
                        is released).
      docbook-5.1     : The 5.1 release
      docbook50-rewind: The 5.0 release
      *               : random other feature branches
    
    Itâs a small change but it makes some of the work Iâm trying to do
    *right now* simpler and it means that the branch everyone expects to see
    first when the come to the repository will appear active and reflect the
    latest changes.
    
    Thereâs nothing here that changes releases, and thereâs nothing that
    prevents anyone from getting the branch that has a particular release on
    it. It just moves things around a bit.
    
    Iâd like to make this change, but I donât want to do it without giving
    everyone who might care a chance to voice an opinion.
    
    If you think this is a bad idea, please say so.
    
    If you think this is a good idea, please say so.
    
    If you want more time to think about it, or you want to ask questions,
    please say so.
    
    As I said, the change doesnât have any material impact really on what
    the TC produces, so if there are no ânoâ votes or âI need more time
    votesâ over the next couple of days, Iâm going to go ahead and do it.
    
    At that time, Iâll also setup automatic builds and make a 5.2b10a alpha
    release of both DocBook and Publishers. Unless someone objects, of
    course. Which is absolutely fine, Iâm trying to get some things done,
    but Iâm not trying to railroad anything past anyone.
    
                                            Be seeing you,
                                              norm
    
    --
    Norman Tovey-Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com>
    https://nwalsh.com/
    
    > It is better to waste one's youth than to do nothing with it at
    > all.--Georges Courteline