GENIVI Git Strategy Meeting Minutes

Walt Miner wminer at linuxfoundation.org
Wed Jan 13 16:55:10 EST 2016


Will there be any follow up to this?  I will say I like the gerrit approach
because it encompasses both branch management and code review. You can
incorporate email patches into the work flow as well.

Walt

On Tue, Jan 5, 2016 at 2:48 PM, Jeremiah Foster <
jeremiah.foster at pelagicore.com> wrote:

> Hi everyone,
>
> Thanks again Magnus et. al. for bringing this topic up.
>
> On Wed, Dec 16, 2015 at 9:03 PM, Paul Sherwood <
> paul.sherwood at codethink.co.uk> wrote:
>
>> Hi Magnus,
>> thanks for this... some comments inline...
>>
>> As I said at the meeting, what Lilli described seems fine as a
>> recommended workflow, particularly for github-based projects.
>>
>> I wonder if it would make sense to add diagrams to the doc, based on what
>> Lilli drew during the meeting while describing use-cases.
>>
>> WRT the 'strategy' discussion I think there are some underlying approach
>> questions, which need to be clarified:
>> - how to deal with projects where we (genivi, agl) are not the ultimate
>> upstream, but need to modify the code and maintain those modifications
>> - github verses alternative approaches
>> - code review via pull-requests (github, gitlab), or gerrit or something
>> else
>>
>> DISCUSSION - ENFORCABILITY
>>> Jeremiah highlighted the wide variety of projects GENIVI is running in
>>> several different environments, and pointed out that it can be hard
>>> for people to move from todays patch-based solution to something that
>>> is pull request-based.
>>>
>>
>> Absolutely - this depends very much on how the project team prefers to
>> work.
>
>
> Here's one example of the type of workflow that I was referring to when I
> spoke about a "series of patches", the following is an excerpt from this
> page:
> http://lists.genivi.org/pipermail/genivi-ivi-layer-management/2015-December/thread.html
>
> [PATCH 0/3] Proposal of ivi_share protocol   Tanibata, Nobuhiko (ADITJ/SWG)
> [PATCH 1/3] protocol: Add new protocol to share ivi-surface   Tanibata,
> Nobuhiko (ADITJ/SWG)
> [PATCH 2/3] ivi-share: Initial implementation of ivi_share protocol.
> Tanibata, Nobuhiko (ADITJ/SWG)
> [PATCH 3/3] ivi-layermanagement-examples: an example of ivi_share
> Tanibata, Nobuhiko (ADITJ/SWG)
>
> This series of emails, each with its own numbered patch, is much easier to
> deal with than a single large patch for example. While one can easily break
> up pull requests on GitHub as well, there are additional advantages to this
> format. Firstly, git provides convenient tools to create this type of patch
> set: https://git-scm.com/docs/git-send-email Secondly, it also provides a
> means to consume such patch sets; https://git-scm.com/docs/git-am
>
> For those who spend a lot of time in git and working on mailing lists
> (which is pretty much the de facto approach for large Open Source
> projects), this work flow is efficient. I don't know that GitHub provides a
> similar workflow and I would hesitate to try and dictate tooling choices
> for developers who are productive.
>
> [snip]
>
> Regards,
>
> Jeremiah
>
> _______________________________________________
> genivi-projects mailing list
> genivi-projects at lists.genivi.org
> https://lists.genivi.org/mailman/listinfo/genivi-projects
>
>


-- 
Walt Miner
Engineering Project Manager
The Linux Foundation
mobile: +1.847.502.7087
skype: vstarwalt

Visit us at:
automotive.linuxfoundation.org
www.linuxfoundation.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.genivi.org/pipermail/genivi-projects_lists.genivi.org/attachments/20160113/badd4431/attachment.html>


More information about the genivi-projects mailing list