From damien.nozay at gmail.com  Sun Nov  2 16:28:31 2014
From: damien.nozay at gmail.com (Damien)
Date: Sun, 2 Nov 2014 08:28:31 -0800
Subject: How we use Git
In-Reply-To: <CABD0r1157enOsRuLm2sBjRfdH99y2Rx=okxNABu7POxxWBqNxw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <scednUcn3q1z7M7JnZ2dnUU7-WmdnZ2d@mozilla.org>
	<S5mdnXrHH8uYSM7JnZ2dnUU7-YGdnZ2d@mozilla.org>
	<CABD0r1157enOsRuLm2sBjRfdH99y2Rx=okxNABu7POxxWBqNxw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAAe5jyNQXu-_F0DsBRu8N_f_f47+KZGS__0SjED0hSzft8XX-g@mail.gmail.com>

I would do...

cd bugzilla

# hum, what is new today?
git fetch

# hum what tags are there (in case i missed reading the output of git fetch)
git tags

# hum what branches are still alive?
git branches -a

# I want that one for some reason.
git checkout bugzilla-4.4.6

...

# let's get to business.
git checkout -b werk origin/4.4
git add ...
git commit ...

# reviews.
# more hacking
# ...
# done
git push origin werk:origin/4.4




On Fri, Oct 31, 2014 at 3:10 PM, Michiel Beijen <michiel.beijen at gmail.com>
wrote:

> Hi,
>
> On Fri, Oct 31, 2014 at 7:29 PM, Mark C?t? <mcote at mozilla.com> wrote:
> >
> > On 2014-10-31 7:26 AM, Gervase Markham wrote:
> > > A quick quiz:
> > >
> > > Q1: What git commands would I use to obtain an exact copy of 4.4.6 from
> > > our git repo?
> > >
> > > Q2: Same question for 4.4.4.
>
> > Regarding Randall's message, we could branch for every release; indeed,
> > given git's very light-weight approach to branches, there are many
> > strategies for developing under git.  However, given our relatively
> > small change volume, I don't think it's worth the extra overhead, at the
> > moment at least.
>
> I don't think there would be any additional benefit for having
> branches over tags for releases. I think tags are actually beneficial
> since they are *fixed* i.e. they can not change over time (as with a
> release, which you create at one given day and then it's out of the
> door, as with the 4.4.4 release) whereas the branch has the
> possibility of future releases: you might want to check out the branch
> of 4.4 to work on it to create 4.4.7 one day. And if you want to go
> back to 4.4.4 or 3.2.whatever then you can still check out the tag,
> create a branch from that point with your patch, or perform your test,
> and it would work.
>
> Git also has the notion of signed tags so you can cryptographically
> guarantee a tag is exact *this* version of the project, and the source
> has not been messed with. Although I think I don't know many projects
> that actually use this feature. Usually a sha1 of a tarbal is deemed
> enough.
>
> If you have a reasonably new git (1.8) you can even clone a repo at a
> given tag. So your question above would be answered with:
>
> git clone --branch bugzilla-4.4.6 http://git.mozilla.org/bugzilla/bugzilla
>
> BTW the answer of your initial question is also mentioned on this
> page: https://wiki.mozilla.org/Bugzilla:Git#Getting_A_Specific_Release
>
> --
> Mike
> _______________________________________________
> dev-apps-bugzilla mailing list
> dev-apps-bugzilla at lists.mozilla.org
> https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-apps-bugzilla
> -
> To view or change your list settings, click here:
> <http://bugzilla.org/cgi-bin/mj_wwwusr?user=$MSGRCPT>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.bugzilla.org/pipermail/developers/attachments/20141102/846fdaf2/attachment.html>

From gerv at mozilla.org  Mon Nov  3 13:41:04 2014
From: gerv at mozilla.org (Gervase Markham)
Date: Mon, 03 Nov 2014 13:41:04 +0000
Subject: How we use Git
In-Reply-To: <mailman.2059.1414758937.26608.dev-apps-bugzilla@lists.mozilla.org>
References: <scednUcn3q1z7M7JnZ2dnUU7-WmdnZ2d@mozilla.org>
	<mailman.2059.1414758937.26608.dev-apps-bugzilla@lists.mozilla.org>
Message-ID: <coOdnXQYTd5tGMrJnZ2dnUU7-X2dnZ2d@mozilla.org>

On 31/10/14 12:33, Simon Green wrote:
> I would turn the question around. If you are using git (or bzr or csv)
> to get code, what is wrong with getting the latest code for the branch,
> rather than the latest release of the code?

Because then each person who has "4.4.6" installed actually has slightly
different code to everyone else. If I want to reproduce your bug, I
can't just ask you what version you have, I have to ask for the SHA-1 ID.

I'm not sure I know of any project which has defined "version X.Y.Z" as
referring to any one of 10 possible versions of the code which existed
around that time", and I can sort of see why no-one has tried this. :-)

Gerv

_______________________________________________
dev-apps-bugzilla mailing list
dev-apps-bugzilla at lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-apps-bugzilla


From gerv at mozilla.org  Mon Nov  3 13:45:52 2014
From: gerv at mozilla.org (Gervase Markham)
Date: Mon, 03 Nov 2014 13:45:52 +0000
Subject: How we use Git
In-Reply-To: <S5mdnXrHH8uYSM7JnZ2dnUU7-YGdnZ2d@mozilla.org>
References: <scednUcn3q1z7M7JnZ2dnUU7-WmdnZ2d@mozilla.org>
	<S5mdnXrHH8uYSM7JnZ2dnUU7-YGdnZ2d@mozilla.org>
Message-ID: <54578710.5040805@mozilla.org>

On 31/10/14 18:29, Mark C?t? wrote:
> Almost.  You would do up to 'cd bugzilla', then
> 
> git checkout bugzilla-4.4.6
> 
> 'bugzilla-4.4.6' is a tag on the last commit included in the release.
> We create similar tags for all releases.

You see, I did not know that. That is important information :-)

So your "Almost" is actually a "not really"!

I will update the new docs accordingly.

How about this for a suggestion? We currently tag the first in the "4.4"
series as "bugzilla-4.4". Would it be better to tag it as
"bugzilla-4.4.0", either instead or additionally? That would make
instructions on how to pull a particular version easier to write,
because you wouldn't need to special-case the first release.

You see, it's not immediately clear to an observer if
git checkout bugzilla-4.4
is pulling the latest 4.4 or the original release of 4.4.

> Let me know if anything is still unclear.  Btw, for anyone still
> confused about git, I *highly* recommend the book Pro Git, which is
> available for free at http://git-scm.com/book/. 

I've been reading O'Reillys "Version control with Git" which is also
very good.

Gerv

_______________________________________________
dev-apps-bugzilla mailing list
dev-apps-bugzilla at lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-apps-bugzilla

From gerv at mozilla.org  Mon Nov  3 13:50:42 2014
From: gerv at mozilla.org (Gervase Markham)
Date: Mon, 03 Nov 2014 13:50:42 +0000
Subject: How we use Git
In-Reply-To: <S5mdnXrHH8uYSM7JnZ2dnUU7-YGdnZ2d@mozilla.org>
References: <scednUcn3q1z7M7JnZ2dnUU7-WmdnZ2d@mozilla.org>
	<S5mdnXrHH8uYSM7JnZ2dnUU7-YGdnZ2d@mozilla.org>
Message-ID: <YbydnXb7HeCvFcrJnZ2dnUU7-S8AAAAA@mozilla.org>

On 31/10/14 18:29, Mark C?t? wrote:
> Almost.  You would do up to 'cd bugzilla', then
> 
> git checkout bugzilla-4.4.6
> 
> 'bugzilla-4.4.6' is a tag on the last commit included in the release.
> We create similar tags for all releases.

You see, I did not know that. That is important information :-)

So your "Almost" is actually a "not really"!

I will update the new docs accordingly.

How about this for a suggestion? We currently tag the first in the "4.4"
series as "bugzilla-4.4". Would it be better to tag it as
"bugzilla-4.4.0", either instead or additionally? That would make
instructions on how to pull a particular version easier to write,
because you wouldn't need to special-case the first release.

You see, it's not immediately clear to an observer if
git checkout bugzilla-4.4
is pulling the latest 4.4 or the original release of 4.4.

> Let me know if anything is still unclear.  Btw, for anyone still
> confused about git, I *highly* recommend the book Pro Git, which is
> available for free at http://git-scm.com/book/. 

I've been reading O'Reillys "Version control with Git" which is also
very good.

Gerv

_______________________________________________
dev-apps-bugzilla mailing list
dev-apps-bugzilla at lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-apps-bugzilla

From gerv at mozilla.org  Mon Nov  3 13:50:12 2014
From: gerv at mozilla.org (Gervase Markham)
Date: Mon, 03 Nov 2014 13:50:12 +0000
Subject: How we use Git
In-Reply-To: <mailman.2115.1414793486.26608.dev-apps-bugzilla@lists.mozilla.org>
References: <scednUcn3q1z7M7JnZ2dnUU7-WmdnZ2d@mozilla.org>	<S5mdnXrHH8uYSM7JnZ2dnUU7-YGdnZ2d@mozilla.org>
	<mailman.2115.1414793486.26608.dev-apps-bugzilla@lists.mozilla.org>
Message-ID: <YbydnXf7HeCJFcrJnZ2dnUU7-S-dnZ2d@mozilla.org>

On 31/10/14 22:10, Michiel Beijen wrote:
> If you have a reasonably new git (1.8) you can even clone a repo at a
> given tag. So your question above would be answered with:
> 
> git clone --branch bugzilla-4.4.6 http://git.mozilla.org/bugzilla/bugzilla

So to be clear: you use "--branch" even if you are cloning at a given tag?

Will the repo you get be exactly the same, the only difference being
that the checkout will be switched to the correct branch/tag?

> BTW the answer of your initial question is also mentioned on this
> page: https://wiki.mozilla.org/Bugzilla:Git#Getting_A_Specific_Release

Why did I not know about that page? :-) There's good stuff in there.

Gerv

_______________________________________________
dev-apps-bugzilla mailing list
dev-apps-bugzilla at lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-apps-bugzilla


From mcote at mozilla.com  Mon Nov  3 14:13:12 2014
From: mcote at mozilla.com (=?UTF-8?B?TWFyayBDw7R0w6k=?=)
Date: Mon, 03 Nov 2014 09:13:12 -0500
Subject: How we use Git
In-Reply-To: <54578710.5040805@mozilla.org>
References: <scednUcn3q1z7M7JnZ2dnUU7-WmdnZ2d@mozilla.org>
	<S5mdnXrHH8uYSM7JnZ2dnUU7-YGdnZ2d@mozilla.org>
	<54578710.5040805@mozilla.org>
Message-ID: <nbWdneDtpLflEMrJnZ2dnUU7-e2dnZ2d@mozilla.org>

On 2014-11-03 8:45 AM, Gervase Markham wrote:
> On 31/10/14 18:29, Mark C?t? wrote:
>> Almost.  You would do up to 'cd bugzilla', then
>>
>> git checkout bugzilla-4.4.6
>>
>> 'bugzilla-4.4.6' is a tag on the last commit included in the release.
>> We create similar tags for all releases.
> 
> You see, I did not know that. That is important information :-)

It's the same procedure we did with bzr, no?  It's also a very common
practice.  That said, if it's not documented anywhere, I agree that it
should be.

> How about this for a suggestion? We currently tag the first in the "4.4"
> series as "bugzilla-4.4". Would it be better to tag it as
> "bugzilla-4.4.0", either instead or additionally? That would make
> instructions on how to pull a particular version easier to write,
> because you wouldn't need to special-case the first release.
> 
> You see, it's not immediately clear to an observer if
> git checkout bugzilla-4.4
> is pulling the latest 4.4 or the original release of 4.4.

I would counter for two reasons:

1. The name of the release is 4.4, not 4.4.0.  I would argue that it's
more confusing that, to find 4.4's release, you have to look for
bugzilla-4.4.0, that is, unless we want to change how we name the
initial release of a new version.

2. bugzilla-4.4 is a tag, whereas 4.4 is a branch.  Across many VCSes,
not just git, tags are used to indicate snapshots, often releases, and
branches are where development specific to a base release (e.g. 4.4.*)
occurs.  This is again roughly how we used bzr.  If you ever want the
latest of anything, you go to the head of the branch.  It's the same for
master as it is for any release branch.

Mark



_______________________________________________
dev-apps-bugzilla mailing list
dev-apps-bugzilla at lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-apps-bugzilla

From gerv at mozilla.org  Mon Nov  3 14:24:10 2014
From: gerv at mozilla.org (Gervase Markham)
Date: Mon, 03 Nov 2014 14:24:10 +0000
Subject: How we use Git
In-Reply-To: <nbWdneDtpLflEMrJnZ2dnUU7-e2dnZ2d@mozilla.org>
References: <scednUcn3q1z7M7JnZ2dnUU7-WmdnZ2d@mozilla.org>
	<S5mdnXrHH8uYSM7JnZ2dnUU7-YGdnZ2d@mozilla.org>
	<54578710.5040805@mozilla.org>
	<nbWdneDtpLflEMrJnZ2dnUU7-e2dnZ2d@mozilla.org>
Message-ID: <veWdnZA8KuqWDcrJnZ2dnUU7-aOdnZ2d@mozilla.org>

On 03/11/14 14:13, Mark C?t? wrote:
> It's the same procedure we did with bzr, no?  

Yes, indeed. I just hadn't twigged that Git had tags and that we were
still using them. <shrug> For some reason, I expected to see them listed
with "git branch".

> It's also a very common
> practice.  That said, if it's not documented anywhere, I agree that it
> should be.

Well, it's because I'm writing the docs that I asked! :-) But it seems
to be documented on the wiki.

> 1. The name of the release is 4.4, not 4.4.0.

That would be a reason to tag as 4.4.0 in addition, rather than instead
of, 4.4.

> 2. bugzilla-4.4 is a tag, whereas 4.4 is a branch.  

That is true. However, it seems from previous conversations that git
uses git checkout --branch to pull both. I'm just saying it may not be
obvious to a new Bugzilla admin that:

git checkout --branch bugzilla-4.4

gives you the checkout of a tag, which doesn't move, but:

git checkout --branch 4.4

gives you a branch, which does.

> Across many VCSes,
> not just git, tags are used to indicate snapshots, often releases, and
> branches are where development specific to a base release (e.g. 4.4.*)
> occurs.  This is again roughly how we used bzr.  If you ever want the
> latest of anything, you go to the head of the branch.  It's the same for
> master as it is for any release branch.

I'm not arguing we should change our plan about what's a branch and
what's a tag, or change our general development practice.

It's not a big deal, though.

Gerv

_______________________________________________
dev-apps-bugzilla mailing list
dev-apps-bugzilla at lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-apps-bugzilla

From gerv at mozilla.org  Mon Nov  3 14:27:34 2014
From: gerv at mozilla.org (Gervase Markham)
Date: Mon, 03 Nov 2014 14:27:34 +0000
Subject: How we use Git
In-Reply-To: <scednUcn3q1z7M7JnZ2dnUU7-WmdnZ2d@mozilla.org>
References: <scednUcn3q1z7M7JnZ2dnUU7-WmdnZ2d@mozilla.org>
Message-ID: <QcqdnQbxQLJKDcrJnZ2dnUU7-aWdnZ2d@mozilla.org>

On 31/10/14 11:26, Gervase Markham wrote:
> A quick quiz:

OK, follow up. So it seems like the best way to get from git a copy of
Bugzilla to run is:

git clone http://git.mozilla.org/bugzilla/bugzilla.git
cd bugzilla
git checkout bugzilla-stable

This will give you whatever the latest stable code is, right?

Some time later, as an admin, I want to update my code to take the
latest security releases for my version. What do I do? If I try:

git pull
git checkout bugzilla-stable

might well upgrade me to a new version, if one has been released
mean-time! I could find out what the new version is from the release
announcement and do:

git pull
git checkout bugzilla-X.Y.Z

but it would be easier to document if we had

bugzilla-4.2-stable
bugzilla-4.4-stable
etc.

tags. Looking at the list, we don't seem to have them. Are they a good idea?

Gerv

_______________________________________________
dev-apps-bugzilla mailing list
dev-apps-bugzilla at lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-apps-bugzilla


From mcote at mozilla.com  Mon Nov  3 14:46:57 2014
From: mcote at mozilla.com (=?UTF-8?B?TWFyayBDw7R0w6k=?=)
Date: Mon, 03 Nov 2014 09:46:57 -0500
Subject: How we use Git
In-Reply-To: <veWdnZA8KuqWDcrJnZ2dnUU7-aOdnZ2d@mozilla.org>
References: <scednUcn3q1z7M7JnZ2dnUU7-WmdnZ2d@mozilla.org>
	<S5mdnXrHH8uYSM7JnZ2dnUU7-YGdnZ2d@mozilla.org>
	<54578710.5040805@mozilla.org>
	<nbWdneDtpLflEMrJnZ2dnUU7-e2dnZ2d@mozilla.org>
	<veWdnZA8KuqWDcrJnZ2dnUU7-aOdnZ2d@mozilla.org>
Message-ID: <3oWdnWQoy6__CMrJnZ2dnUU7-e2dnZ2d@mozilla.org>

On 2014-11-03 9:24 AM, Gervase Markham wrote:
> On 03/11/14 14:13, Mark C?t? wrote:
>> 1. The name of the release is 4.4, not 4.4.0.
> 
> That would be a reason to tag as 4.4.0 in addition, rather than instead
> of, 4.4.

Sure, that still strikes me as slightly confusing (browsing the list of
tags, seeing "bugzilla-4.4.0", then looking at release list and not
seeing it).  But less so than not taking bugzilla-4.4 at all.  However,
see my proposal at the bottom of this post.

>> 2. bugzilla-4.4 is a tag, whereas 4.4 is a branch.  
> 
> That is true. However, it seems from previous conversations that git
> uses git checkout --branch to pull both. I'm just saying it may not be
> obvious to a new Bugzilla admin that:
> 
> git checkout --branch bugzilla-4.4
> 
> gives you the checkout of a tag, which doesn't move, but:
> 
> git checkout --branch 4.4
> 
> gives you a branch, which does.

Wellllll sorta.  Branches and tags are almost the exact same thing in
git.  The difference is that the latter (--branch 4.4) takes you to the
*HEAD* of the 4.4 branch.  Essentially, "4.4" is a movable tag that
always points to the last commit in that branch (the HEAD), whereas
"bugzilla-4.4" is always frozen to a particular commit.

You can see how the two ideas bleed over when you try checking out a
remote branch, e.g. 'git checkout <origin>/<branch>'; although you are
checking out someone's *branch*, since it's remote you can't add to it,
so you are given the same "detached head" warning (you have to create a
local branch to do commits).  But I digress. :)

Maybe a lot of confusion would be eliminated by using the tag name
"release-4.4" instead of "bugzilla-4.4".  Really, "bugzilla" is pretty
redundant in tag names.  I would be up for doing that (we can also
retroactively apply that tag name, though we'd want to leave the old
style in there as well for existing releases).

Mark

_______________________________________________
dev-apps-bugzilla mailing list
dev-apps-bugzilla at lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-apps-bugzilla

From mcote at mozilla.com  Mon Nov  3 14:53:49 2014
From: mcote at mozilla.com (=?UTF-8?B?TWFyayBDw7R0w6k=?=)
Date: Mon, 03 Nov 2014 09:53:49 -0500
Subject: How we use Git
In-Reply-To: <QcqdnQbxQLJKDcrJnZ2dnUU7-aWdnZ2d@mozilla.org>
References: <scednUcn3q1z7M7JnZ2dnUU7-WmdnZ2d@mozilla.org>
	<QcqdnQbxQLJKDcrJnZ2dnUU7-aWdnZ2d@mozilla.org>
Message-ID: <rJudnRmMhr1jC8rJnZ2dnUU7-TGdnZ2d@mozilla.org>

On 2014-11-03 9:27 AM, Gervase Markham wrote:
> On 31/10/14 11:26, Gervase Markham wrote:
> but it would be easier to document if we had
> 
> bugzilla-4.2-stable
> bugzilla-4.4-stable
> etc.
> 
> tags. Looking at the list, we don't seem to have them. Are they a good idea?

Not a bad idea at all; however, I would want to make them technically
branches, not tags, since tags are supposed to be unmovable (we should
be doing this with bugzilla-stable as well, but I'm not sure how, since
it jumps from branch to branch).  But you don't have to think of them as
branches, since they won't diverge from the parent branch.  It will
avoid having to do a "push -f", which we need to do with bugzilla-stable
right now, but which we should actually never ever never do.

Mark

_______________________________________________
dev-apps-bugzilla mailing list
dev-apps-bugzilla at lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-apps-bugzilla


From gerv at mozilla.org  Mon Nov  3 15:12:33 2014
From: gerv at mozilla.org (Gervase Markham)
Date: Mon, 03 Nov 2014 15:12:33 +0000
Subject: How we use Git
In-Reply-To: <3oWdnWQoy6__CMrJnZ2dnUU7-e2dnZ2d@mozilla.org>
References: <scednUcn3q1z7M7JnZ2dnUU7-WmdnZ2d@mozilla.org>
	<S5mdnXrHH8uYSM7JnZ2dnUU7-YGdnZ2d@mozilla.org>
	<54578710.5040805@mozilla.org>
	<nbWdneDtpLflEMrJnZ2dnUU7-e2dnZ2d@mozilla.org>
	<veWdnZA8KuqWDcrJnZ2dnUU7-aOdnZ2d@mozilla.org>
	<3oWdnWQoy6__CMrJnZ2dnUU7-e2dnZ2d@mozilla.org>
Message-ID: <jMadnYdwwLz8BsrJnZ2dnUU7-amdnZ2d@mozilla.org>

On 03/11/14 14:46, Mark C?t? wrote:
> Maybe a lot of confusion would be eliminated by using the tag name
> "release-4.4" instead of "bugzilla-4.4".  Really, "bugzilla" is pretty
> redundant in tag names.  I would be up for doing that (we can also
> retroactively apply that tag name, though we'd want to leave the old
> style in there as well for existing releases).

Yep, I'd buy that. We'd want to retroactively apply it in order to make
writing documentation easier. That would eliminate the confusion, I think.

Gerv


_______________________________________________
dev-apps-bugzilla mailing list
dev-apps-bugzilla at lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-apps-bugzilla

From gerv at mozilla.org  Mon Nov  3 15:15:58 2014
From: gerv at mozilla.org (Gervase Markham)
Date: Mon, 03 Nov 2014 15:15:58 +0000
Subject: How we use Git
In-Reply-To: <rJudnRmMhr1jC8rJnZ2dnUU7-TGdnZ2d@mozilla.org>
References: <scednUcn3q1z7M7JnZ2dnUU7-WmdnZ2d@mozilla.org>
	<QcqdnQbxQLJKDcrJnZ2dnUU7-aWdnZ2d@mozilla.org>
	<rJudnRmMhr1jC8rJnZ2dnUU7-TGdnZ2d@mozilla.org>
Message-ID: <mPudnSQtn62zAcrJnZ2dnUU7-e-dnZ2d@mozilla.org>

On 03/11/14 14:53, Mark C?t? wrote:
> Not a bad idea at all; however, I would want to make them technically
> branches, not tags, since tags are supposed to be unmovable (we should
> be doing this with bugzilla-stable as well, but I'm not sure how, since
> it jumps from branch to branch).  But you don't have to think of them as
> branches, since they won't diverge from the parent branch.  It will
> avoid having to do a "push -f", which we need to do with bugzilla-stable
> right now, but which we should actually never ever never do.

Yes, that sounds like a good idea.

Do we actually want a bugzilla-stable branch/tag? Given the risks of
accidentally moving from e.g. 4.2 to 4.4 by using it, why would anyone
ever want to track it?

I think we should only have "bugzilla-X.X-stable" branches, and if
someone wants to upgrade further than a point release, they have to
actively take the steps to move branch (git checkout etc.) rather than
just a git pull.

So the workflows would then be:

Initial installation:

git clone http://git.mozilla.org/bugzilla/bugzilla.git
cd bugzilla
git checkout bugzilla-4.2-stable

Upgrade to latest 4.2 release at any time:

git pull

Upgrade to 4.4:

git pull
git checkout bugzilla-4.4-stable

That all seems nice and simple to me.

Gerv

_______________________________________________
dev-apps-bugzilla mailing list
dev-apps-bugzilla at lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-apps-bugzilla

From mcote at mozilla.com  Mon Nov  3 15:39:38 2014
From: mcote at mozilla.com (=?UTF-8?B?TWFyayBDw7R0w6k=?=)
Date: Mon, 03 Nov 2014 10:39:38 -0500
Subject: How we use Git
In-Reply-To: <mPudnSQtn62zAcrJnZ2dnUU7-e-dnZ2d@mozilla.org>
References: <scednUcn3q1z7M7JnZ2dnUU7-WmdnZ2d@mozilla.org>
	<QcqdnQbxQLJKDcrJnZ2dnUU7-aWdnZ2d@mozilla.org>
	<rJudnRmMhr1jC8rJnZ2dnUU7-TGdnZ2d@mozilla.org>
	<mPudnSQtn62zAcrJnZ2dnUU7-e-dnZ2d@mozilla.org>
Message-ID: <TuOdnUjSD_4nPMrJnZ2dnUU7-IednZ2d@mozilla.org>

On 2014-11-03 10:15 AM, Gervase Markham wrote:
> On 03/11/14 14:53, Mark C?t? wrote:
>> Not a bad idea at all; however, I would want to make them technically
>> branches, not tags, since tags are supposed to be unmovable (we should
>> be doing this with bugzilla-stable as well, but I'm not sure how, since
>> it jumps from branch to branch).  But you don't have to think of them as
>> branches, since they won't diverge from the parent branch.  It will
>> avoid having to do a "push -f", which we need to do with bugzilla-stable
>> right now, but which we should actually never ever never do.
> 
> Yes, that sounds like a good idea.
> 
> Do we actually want a bugzilla-stable branch/tag? Given the risks of
> accidentally moving from e.g. 4.2 to 4.4 by using it, why would anyone
> ever want to track it?
> 
> I think we should only have "bugzilla-X.X-stable" branches, and if
> someone wants to upgrade further than a point release, they have to
> actively take the steps to move branch (git checkout etc.) rather than
> just a git pull.

A very good point.  I'm up for removing bugzilla-stable.  And in keeping
with the other thread, we should probably name these "release-X.X-stable".

> So the workflows would then be:
> 
> Initial installation:
> 
> git clone http://git.mozilla.org/bugzilla/bugzilla.git
> cd bugzilla
> git checkout bugzilla-4.2-stable

or just

git clone --branch bugzilla-4.2-stable
http://git.mozilla.org/bugzilla/bugzilla.git

> Upgrade to latest 4.2 release at any time:
> 
> git pull
> 
> Upgrade to 4.4:
> 
> git pull
> git checkout bugzilla-4.4-stable

Technically in the upgrade case you just need to do

git fetch
git checkout bugzilla-4.4-stable

"pull" does a "fetch" but also also merges in changes to your current
branch, which you don't need if you'll be switching branches.

> That all seems nice and simple to me.

It sure does! :)

Mark

_______________________________________________
dev-apps-bugzilla mailing list
dev-apps-bugzilla at lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-apps-bugzilla

From gerv at mozilla.org  Mon Nov  3 15:52:29 2014
From: gerv at mozilla.org (Gervase Markham)
Date: Mon, 03 Nov 2014 15:52:29 +0000
Subject: How we use Git
In-Reply-To: <TuOdnUjSD_4nPMrJnZ2dnUU7-IednZ2d@mozilla.org>
References: <scednUcn3q1z7M7JnZ2dnUU7-WmdnZ2d@mozilla.org>
	<QcqdnQbxQLJKDcrJnZ2dnUU7-aWdnZ2d@mozilla.org>
	<rJudnRmMhr1jC8rJnZ2dnUU7-TGdnZ2d@mozilla.org>
	<mPudnSQtn62zAcrJnZ2dnUU7-e-dnZ2d@mozilla.org>
	<TuOdnUjSD_4nPMrJnZ2dnUU7-IednZ2d@mozilla.org>
Message-ID: <L5-dnVJtHv4gOcrJnZ2dnUU7-UOdnZ2d@mozilla.org>

On 03/11/14 15:39, Mark C?t? wrote:
> A very good point.  I'm up for removing bugzilla-stable.  And in keeping
> with the other thread, we should probably name these "release-X.X-stable".

Well, release-4.4.6 would be a tag, but release-4.4-stable would be a
branch. And yet they feel like similar things. Is that a problem, or not?

> or just
> 
> git clone --branch bugzilla-4.2-stable
> http://git.mozilla.org/bugzilla/bugzilla.git

Yes, indeed :-)

Gerv
_______________________________________________
dev-apps-bugzilla mailing list
dev-apps-bugzilla at lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-apps-bugzilla

From mcote at mozilla.com  Mon Nov  3 16:06:49 2014
From: mcote at mozilla.com (=?UTF-8?B?TWFyayBDw7R0w6k=?=)
Date: Mon, 03 Nov 2014 11:06:49 -0500
Subject: How we use Git
In-Reply-To: <L5-dnVJtHv4gOcrJnZ2dnUU7-UOdnZ2d@mozilla.org>
References: <scednUcn3q1z7M7JnZ2dnUU7-WmdnZ2d@mozilla.org>
	<QcqdnQbxQLJKDcrJnZ2dnUU7-aWdnZ2d@mozilla.org>
	<rJudnRmMhr1jC8rJnZ2dnUU7-TGdnZ2d@mozilla.org>
	<mPudnSQtn62zAcrJnZ2dnUU7-e-dnZ2d@mozilla.org>
	<TuOdnUjSD_4nPMrJnZ2dnUU7-IednZ2d@mozilla.org>
	<L5-dnVJtHv4gOcrJnZ2dnUU7-UOdnZ2d@mozilla.org>
Message-ID: <bdCdneZDLJ2ENcrJnZ2dnUU7-dmdnZ2d@mozilla.org>

On 2014-11-03 10:52 AM, Gervase Markham wrote:
> On 03/11/14 15:39, Mark C?t? wrote:
>> A very good point.  I'm up for removing bugzilla-stable.  And in keeping
>> with the other thread, we should probably name these "release-X.X-stable".
> 
> Well, release-4.4.6 would be a tag, but release-4.4-stable would be a
> branch. And yet they feel like similar things. Is that a problem, or not?

Hm, well, it's easy enough to tell which is which, and I'm not sure that
naming one "release" and one "bugzilla" would really lessen any
confusion.  They function pretty similarly, and I bet most people
probably wouldn't use the tag at all.  But I'm open to other suggestions.

Mark

_______________________________________________
dev-apps-bugzilla mailing list
dev-apps-bugzilla at lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-apps-bugzilla

From rsbecker at nexbridge.com  Mon Nov  3 16:25:00 2014
From: rsbecker at nexbridge.com (Randall S. Becker)
Date: Mon, 3 Nov 2014 11:25:00 -0500
Subject: How we use Git
In-Reply-To: <L5-dnVJtHv4gOcrJnZ2dnUU7-UOdnZ2d@mozilla.org>
References: <scednUcn3q1z7M7JnZ2dnUU7-WmdnZ2d@mozilla.org>	<QcqdnQbxQLJKDcrJnZ2dnUU7-aWdnZ2d@mozilla.org>	<rJudnRmMhr1jC8rJnZ2dnUU7-TGdnZ2d@mozilla.org>	<mPudnSQtn62zAcrJnZ2dnUU7-e-dnZ2d@mozilla.org>	<TuOdnUjSD_4nPMrJnZ2dnUU7-IednZ2d@mozilla.org> <L5-dnVJtHv4gOcrJnZ2dnUU7-UOdnZ2d@mozilla.org>
Message-ID: <007201cff782$b710bb90$253232b0$@nexbridge.com>

>On November 3, 2014 10:52 AM  Gervase Markham wrote:
>On 03/11/14 15:39, Mark C?t? wrote:
>> A very good point.  I'm up for removing bugzilla-stable.  And in 
> keeping with the other thread, we should probably name these "release-X.X-stable".
>Well, release-4.4.6 would be a tag, but release-4.4-stable would be a branch. And yet they feel like similar things. Is that a problem, or not?

The git implication is that the release-X.X-stable branch is where development/fixes would be done in an accumulating fashion. The tag release-4.4.6 could also be used to create a fix branch in an emergency from that tag, but I do not think that follows the Bugzilla fix approach. 

>> or just
>> 
>> git clone --branch bugzilla-4.2-stable 
>> http://git.mozilla.org/bugzilla/bugzilla.git

>Yes, indeed :-)

This would be the way to get the 4.2 fix branch. In the ideal git world, contributors should create their own branch off this one, make their changes on their branch, push, and then approvers would merge the changes onto the 4.2-stable branch and create a release-4.2.1 tag when the fix release goes out. In another ideal world, the changes on the contributor's branch could then be merged into the 4.4-stable branch, if the fix applies there also.

It might be helpful to establish standards for naming those branches. In my git-infused organization, each bug has its own branch (and each developer on that bug has a separate branch, with one developer "owning" the merges). Typically, it is "task-nnnnn-initials" for us, with "task-nnnnn" being the root branch off the release or development branch.

I might be stating the obvious ;-)



From gerv at mozilla.org  Mon Nov  3 16:44:09 2014
From: gerv at mozilla.org (Gervase Markham)
Date: Mon, 03 Nov 2014 16:44:09 +0000
Subject: How we use Git
In-Reply-To: <mailman.2273.1415032025.26608.dev-apps-bugzilla@lists.mozilla.org>
References: <scednUcn3q1z7M7JnZ2dnUU7-WmdnZ2d@mozilla.org>	<QcqdnQbxQLJKDcrJnZ2dnUU7-aWdnZ2d@mozilla.org>	<rJudnRmMhr1jC8rJnZ2dnUU7-TGdnZ2d@mozilla.org>	<mPudnSQtn62zAcrJnZ2dnUU7-e-dnZ2d@mozilla.org>	<TuOdnUjSD_4nPMrJnZ2dnUU7-IednZ2d@mozilla.org>	<L5-dnVJtHv4gOcrJnZ2dnUU7-UOdnZ2d@mozilla.org>
	<mailman.2273.1415032025.26608.dev-apps-bugzilla@lists.mozilla.org>
Message-ID: <osKdnV0beZVHLcrJnZ2dnUU7-IudnZ2d@mozilla.org>

Hi Randall,

I think there's a wire crossed here. We are looking for the git commands
for administrators to use to obtain a copy of Bugzilla for their server,
and perhaps upgrade it. Developers would use different commands.

On 03/11/14 16:25, Randall S. Becker wrote:
> The git implication is that the release-X.X-stable branch is where
> development/fixes would be done in an accumulating fashion. 

No - that's the branch simply called "X.X". The release-X.X-stable
branch would stick at the point where the last release was made, and
then jump forward to the next release point all in one go. This would
mean that people tracking it would have the exact code which went into
one of our point releases, rather than some hybrid in between.

So developers would use the "X.X" branch, and admins would use the
"release-X.X-stable" branch.

Gerv
_______________________________________________
dev-apps-bugzilla mailing list
dev-apps-bugzilla at lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-apps-bugzilla


From rsbecker at nexbridge.com  Mon Nov  3 16:51:31 2014
From: rsbecker at nexbridge.com (Randall S. Becker)
Date: Mon, 3 Nov 2014 11:51:31 -0500
Subject: How we use Git
In-Reply-To: <osKdnV0beZVHLcrJnZ2dnUU7-IudnZ2d@mozilla.org>
References: <scednUcn3q1z7M7JnZ2dnUU7-WmdnZ2d@mozilla.org>	<QcqdnQbxQLJKDcrJnZ2dnUU7-aWdnZ2d@mozilla.org>	<rJudnRmMhr1jC8rJnZ2dnUU7-TGdnZ2d@mozilla.org>	<mPudnSQtn62zAcrJnZ2dnUU7-e-dnZ2d@mozilla.org>	<TuOdnUjSD_4nPMrJnZ2dnUU7-IednZ2d@mozilla.org>	<L5-dnVJtHv4gOcrJnZ2dnUU7-UOdnZ2d@mozilla.org>	<mailman.2273.1415032025.26608.dev-apps-bugzilla@lists.mozilla.org> <osKdnV0beZVHLcrJnZ2dnUU7-IudnZ2d@mozilla.org>
Message-ID: <007e01cff786$6b810690$428313b0$@nexbridge.com>

Sorry about the confusion. The title, you know.

Otherwise, makes sense, Gerv. I don't know that there is a good reason to
have a Tag in that case. Your -stable branch appears to do what is needed
for it, and the Tag is a bit redundant.

-----Original Message-----
From: developers-owner at bugzilla.org [mailto:developers-owner at bugzilla.org]
On Behalf Of Gervase Markham
Sent: November 3, 2014 11:44 AM
To: dev-apps-bugzilla at lists.mozilla.org
Subject: Re: How we use Git

Hi Randall,

I think there's a wire crossed here. We are looking for the git commands for
administrators to use to obtain a copy of Bugzilla for their server, and
perhaps upgrade it. Developers would use different commands.

On 03/11/14 16:25, Randall S. Becker wrote:
> The git implication is that the release-X.X-stable branch is where 
> development/fixes would be done in an accumulating fashion.

No - that's the branch simply called "X.X". The release-X.X-stable branch
would stick at the point where the last release was made, and then jump
forward to the next release point all in one go. This would mean that people
tracking it would have the exact code which went into one of our point
releases, rather than some hybrid in between.

So developers would use the "X.X" branch, and admins would use the
"release-X.X-stable" branch.

Gerv
_______________________________________________
dev-apps-bugzilla mailing list
dev-apps-bugzilla at lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-apps-bugzilla
-
To view or change your list settings, click here:
<http://bugzilla.org/cgi-bin/mj_wwwusr?user=rsbecker at nexbridge.com>



From mcote at mozilla.com  Mon Nov  3 16:58:16 2014
From: mcote at mozilla.com (=?windows-1252?Q?Mark_C=F4t=E9?=)
Date: Mon, 03 Nov 2014 11:58:16 -0500
Subject: How we use Git
In-Reply-To: <mailman.2277.1415033615.26608.dev-apps-bugzilla@lists.mozilla.org>
References: <scednUcn3q1z7M7JnZ2dnUU7-WmdnZ2d@mozilla.org>	<QcqdnQbxQLJKDcrJnZ2dnUU7-aWdnZ2d@mozilla.org>	<rJudnRmMhr1jC8rJnZ2dnUU7-TGdnZ2d@mozilla.org>	<mPudnSQtn62zAcrJnZ2dnUU7-e-dnZ2d@mozilla.org>	<TuOdnUjSD_4nPMrJnZ2dnUU7-IednZ2d@mozilla.org>	<L5-dnVJtHv4gOcrJnZ2dnUU7-UOdnZ2d@mozilla.org>	<mailman.2273.1415032025.26608.dev-apps-bugzilla@lists.mozilla.org>	<osKdnV0beZVHLcrJnZ2dnUU7-IudnZ2d@mozilla.org>
	<mailman.2277.1415033615.26608.dev-apps-bugzilla@lists.mozilla.org>
Message-ID: <7tadnZn-05C6KcrJnZ2dnUU7-T-dnZ2d@mozilla.org>

Well, I think it's still a good idea to tag when releases are made.

Anyway, if we're all in agreement, I can go back and add release-X.Y[.Z]
and release-X.Y-stable tags and delete the bugzilla-stable tag (the
latter being the last push -f we'll hopefully ever need).

Mark


On 2014-11-03 11:51 AM, Randall S. Becker wrote:
> Sorry about the confusion. The title, you know.
> 
> Otherwise, makes sense, Gerv. I don't know that there is a good reason to
> have a Tag in that case. Your -stable branch appears to do what is needed
> for it, and the Tag is a bit redundant.
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: developers-owner at bugzilla.org [mailto:developers-owner at bugzilla.org]
> On Behalf Of Gervase Markham
> Sent: November 3, 2014 11:44 AM
> To: dev-apps-bugzilla at lists.mozilla.org
> Subject: Re: How we use Git
> 
> Hi Randall,
> 
> I think there's a wire crossed here. We are looking for the git commands for
> administrators to use to obtain a copy of Bugzilla for their server, and
> perhaps upgrade it. Developers would use different commands.
> 
> On 03/11/14 16:25, Randall S. Becker wrote:
>> The git implication is that the release-X.X-stable branch is where 
>> development/fixes would be done in an accumulating fashion.
> 
> No - that's the branch simply called "X.X". The release-X.X-stable branch
> would stick at the point where the last release was made, and then jump
> forward to the next release point all in one go. This would mean that people
> tracking it would have the exact code which went into one of our point
> releases, rather than some hybrid in between.
> 
> So developers would use the "X.X" branch, and admins would use the
> "release-X.X-stable" branch.
> 
> Gerv
> _______________________________________________
> dev-apps-bugzilla mailing list
> dev-apps-bugzilla at lists.mozilla.org
> https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-apps-bugzilla
> -
> To view or change your list settings, click here:
> <http://bugzilla.org/cgi-bin/mj_wwwusr?user=rsbecker at nexbridge.com>
> 
> -
> To view or change your list settings, click here:
> <http://bugzilla.org/cgi-bin/mj_wwwusr?user=dev-apps-bugzilla at lists.mozilla.org>
> 

_______________________________________________
dev-apps-bugzilla mailing list
dev-apps-bugzilla at lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-apps-bugzilla


From mcote at mozilla.com  Mon Nov  3 17:04:02 2014
From: mcote at mozilla.com (=?windows-1252?Q?Mark_C=F4t=E9?=)
Date: Mon, 03 Nov 2014 12:04:02 -0500
Subject: How we use Git
In-Reply-To: <7tadnZn-05C6KcrJnZ2dnUU7-T-dnZ2d@mozilla.org>
References: <scednUcn3q1z7M7JnZ2dnUU7-WmdnZ2d@mozilla.org>	<QcqdnQbxQLJKDcrJnZ2dnUU7-aWdnZ2d@mozilla.org>	<rJudnRmMhr1jC8rJnZ2dnUU7-TGdnZ2d@mozilla.org>	<mPudnSQtn62zAcrJnZ2dnUU7-e-dnZ2d@mozilla.org>	<TuOdnUjSD_4nPMrJnZ2dnUU7-IednZ2d@mozilla.org>	<L5-dnVJtHv4gOcrJnZ2dnUU7-UOdnZ2d@mozilla.org>	<mailman.2273.1415032025.26608.dev-apps-bugzilla@lists.mozilla.org>	<osKdnV0beZVHLcrJnZ2dnUU7-IudnZ2d@mozilla.org>
	<mailman.2277.1415033615.26608.dev-apps-bugzilla@lists.mozilla.org>
	<7tadnZn-05C6KcrJnZ2dnUU7-T-dnZ2d@mozilla.org>
Message-ID: <q82dnXKDEPcfKMrJnZ2dnUU7-SWdnZ2d@mozilla.org>

Let me just summarize what we decided:

* We will stop using the tag "bugzilla-X.Y[.Z]" to indicate releases;
instead, we'll use "release-X.Y[.Z]".  We'll keep existing tags of the
former format, but we'll add the new-style tags to them as well, and
only use the new style going forward.

* We will create a lightweight branch off of each release branch named
"release-X.Y-stable", the HEAD of which will always point to the last
release-X.Y[.Z] tag of the X.Y branch, and which will never diverge from
the release branch (i.e. the HEAD of release-X.Y-stable will always
point to a commit somewhere in the X.Y branch and will only be
fast-forwarded when new releases are created).  Are we okay doing this
to supported branches (4.0, 4.2, 4.4) only?

* We will delete bugzilla-stable and stop using it.

Mark

On 2014-11-03 11:58 AM, Mark C?t? wrote:
> Well, I think it's still a good idea to tag when releases are made.
> 
> Anyway, if we're all in agreement, I can go back and add release-X.Y[.Z]
> and release-X.Y-stable tags and delete the bugzilla-stable tag (the
> latter being the last push -f we'll hopefully ever need).
> 
> Mark
> 
> 
> On 2014-11-03 11:51 AM, Randall S. Becker wrote:
>> Sorry about the confusion. The title, you know.
>>
>> Otherwise, makes sense, Gerv. I don't know that there is a good reason to
>> have a Tag in that case. Your -stable branch appears to do what is needed
>> for it, and the Tag is a bit redundant.
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: developers-owner at bugzilla.org [mailto:developers-owner at bugzilla.org]
>> On Behalf Of Gervase Markham
>> Sent: November 3, 2014 11:44 AM
>> To: dev-apps-bugzilla at lists.mozilla.org
>> Subject: Re: How we use Git
>>
>> Hi Randall,
>>
>> I think there's a wire crossed here. We are looking for the git commands for
>> administrators to use to obtain a copy of Bugzilla for their server, and
>> perhaps upgrade it. Developers would use different commands.
>>
>> On 03/11/14 16:25, Randall S. Becker wrote:
>>> The git implication is that the release-X.X-stable branch is where 
>>> development/fixes would be done in an accumulating fashion.
>>
>> No - that's the branch simply called "X.X". The release-X.X-stable branch
>> would stick at the point where the last release was made, and then jump
>> forward to the next release point all in one go. This would mean that people
>> tracking it would have the exact code which went into one of our point
>> releases, rather than some hybrid in between.
>>
>> So developers would use the "X.X" branch, and admins would use the
>> "release-X.X-stable" branch.
>>
>> Gerv
>> _______________________________________________
>> dev-apps-bugzilla mailing list
>> dev-apps-bugzilla at lists.mozilla.org
>> https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-apps-bugzilla
>> -
>> To view or change your list settings, click here:
>> <http://bugzilla.org/cgi-bin/mj_wwwusr?user=rsbecker at nexbridge.com>
>>
>> -
>> To view or change your list settings, click here:
>> <http://bugzilla.org/cgi-bin/mj_wwwusr?user=dev-apps-bugzilla at lists.mozilla.org>
>>
> 

_______________________________________________
dev-apps-bugzilla mailing list
dev-apps-bugzilla at lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-apps-bugzilla


From gerv at mozilla.org  Mon Nov  3 17:06:12 2014
From: gerv at mozilla.org (Gervase Markham)
Date: Mon, 03 Nov 2014 17:06:12 +0000
Subject: How we use Git
In-Reply-To: <5457B5DD.9040202@mozilla.org>
References: <scednUcn3q1z7M7JnZ2dnUU7-WmdnZ2d@mozilla.org>	<QcqdnQbxQLJKDcrJnZ2dnUU7-aWdnZ2d@mozilla.org>	<rJudnRmMhr1jC8rJnZ2dnUU7-TGdnZ2d@mozilla.org>	<mPudnSQtn62zAcrJnZ2dnUU7-e-dnZ2d@mozilla.org>	<TuOdnUjSD_4nPMrJnZ2dnUU7-IednZ2d@mozilla.org>	<L5-dnVJtHv4gOcrJnZ2dnUU7-UOdnZ2d@mozilla.org>	<mailman.2273.1415032025.26608.dev-apps-bugzilla@lists.mozilla.org>	<osKdnV0beZVHLcrJnZ2dnUU7-IudnZ2d@mozilla.org>
	<mailman.2277.1415033615.26608.dev-apps-bugzilla@lists.mozilla.org>
	<7tadnZn-05C6KcrJnZ2dnUU7-T-dnZ2d@mozilla.org>
	<5457B5DD.9040202@mozilla.org>
Message-ID: <T6-dnVzzqcqZK8rJnZ2dnUU7-fOdnZ2d@mozilla.org>

On 03/11/14 17:05, Gervase Markham wrote:
> So here's a summary of the plan:

Wow, great minds :-)

Gerv

_______________________________________________
dev-apps-bugzilla mailing list
dev-apps-bugzilla at lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-apps-bugzilla


From gerv at mozilla.org  Mon Nov  3 17:05:33 2014
From: gerv at mozilla.org (Gervase Markham)
Date: Mon, 03 Nov 2014 17:05:33 +0000
Subject: How we use Git
In-Reply-To: <7tadnZn-05C6KcrJnZ2dnUU7-T-dnZ2d@mozilla.org>
References: <scednUcn3q1z7M7JnZ2dnUU7-WmdnZ2d@mozilla.org>	<QcqdnQbxQLJKDcrJnZ2dnUU7-aWdnZ2d@mozilla.org>	<rJudnRmMhr1jC8rJnZ2dnUU7-TGdnZ2d@mozilla.org>	<mPudnSQtn62zAcrJnZ2dnUU7-e-dnZ2d@mozilla.org>	<TuOdnUjSD_4nPMrJnZ2dnUU7-IednZ2d@mozilla.org>	<L5-dnVJtHv4gOcrJnZ2dnUU7-UOdnZ2d@mozilla.org>	<mailman.2273.1415032025.26608.dev-apps-bugzilla@lists.mozilla.org>	<osKdnV0beZVHLcrJnZ2dnUU7-IudnZ2d@mozilla.org>
	<mailman.2277.1415033615.26608.dev-apps-bugzilla@lists.mozilla.org>
	<7tadnZn-05C6KcrJnZ2dnUU7-T-dnZ2d@mozilla.org>
Message-ID: <5457B5DD.9040202@mozilla.org>

On 03/11/14 16:58, Mark C?t? wrote:
> Anyway, if we're all in agreement, I can go back and add release-X.Y[.Z]
> and release-X.Y-stable tags and delete the bugzilla-stable tag (the
> latter being the last push -f we'll hopefully ever need).

I'd like to hear from dkl as release manager first.

So here's a summary of the plan:

1) Add "release-X.Y[.Z]" tags for every bugzilla-X.Y[.Z] tag back to the
beginning of time

2) Add a bugzilla-X.Y-stable branch for all supported releases (4.0,
4.2, 4.4) pointing at the same place as the most recent release tag

3) Delete the bugzilla-stable tag

4) Update the release process documentation:
   * Change the name of the tag to be created at the release point
   * Add "Create or update the release-X.Y-stable branch" as a step
   * Remove anything about updating the bugzilla-stable tag

5) Update the new docs to use the simple git commands outlined up-thread

Gerv

_______________________________________________
dev-apps-bugzilla mailing list
dev-apps-bugzilla at lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-apps-bugzilla

From lpsolit at gmail.com  Mon Nov  3 19:09:33 2014
From: lpsolit at gmail.com (=?windows-1252?Q?Fr=E9d=E9ric_Buclin?=)
Date: Mon, 03 Nov 2014 20:09:33 +0100
Subject: How we use Git
In-Reply-To: <q82dnXKDEPcfKMrJnZ2dnUU7-SWdnZ2d@mozilla.org>
References: <scednUcn3q1z7M7JnZ2dnUU7-WmdnZ2d@mozilla.org>	<QcqdnQbxQLJKDcrJnZ2dnUU7-aWdnZ2d@mozilla.org>	<rJudnRmMhr1jC8rJnZ2dnUU7-TGdnZ2d@mozilla.org>	<mPudnSQtn62zAcrJnZ2dnUU7-e-dnZ2d@mozilla.org>	<TuOdnUjSD_4nPMrJnZ2dnUU7-IednZ2d@mozilla.org>	<L5-dnVJtHv4gOcrJnZ2dnUU7-UOdnZ2d@mozilla.org>	<mailman.2273.1415032025.26608.dev-apps-bugzilla@lists.mozilla.org>	<osKdnV0beZVHLcrJnZ2dnUU7-IudnZ2d@mozilla.org>	<mailman.2277.1415033615.26608.dev-apps-bugzilla@lists.mozilla.org>	<7tadnZn-05C6KcrJnZ2dnUU7-T-dnZ2d@mozilla.org> <q82dnXKDEPcfKMrJnZ2dnUU7-SWdnZ2d@mozilla.org>
Message-ID: <5457D2ED.8010903@gmail.com>

Le 03. 11. 14 18:04, Mark C?t? a ?crit :
> * We will stop using the tag "bugzilla-X.Y[.Z]" to indicate releases;
> instead, we'll use "release-X.Y[.Z]".  We'll keep existing tags of the
> former format, but we'll add the new-style tags to them as well, and
> only use the new style going forward.

I hope you are only talking about git and are not going to mess with bzr
tags. bzr should still use the current format for tags.


LpSolit



From lpsolit at gmail.com  Mon Nov  3 19:11:47 2014
From: lpsolit at gmail.com (=?UTF-8?B?RnLDqWTDqXJpYyBCdWNsaW4=?=)
Date: Mon, 03 Nov 2014 20:11:47 +0100
Subject: How we use Git
In-Reply-To: <5457B5DD.9040202@mozilla.org>
References: <scednUcn3q1z7M7JnZ2dnUU7-WmdnZ2d@mozilla.org>	<QcqdnQbxQLJKDcrJnZ2dnUU7-aWdnZ2d@mozilla.org>	<rJudnRmMhr1jC8rJnZ2dnUU7-TGdnZ2d@mozilla.org>	<mPudnSQtn62zAcrJnZ2dnUU7-e-dnZ2d@mozilla.org>	<TuOdnUjSD_4nPMrJnZ2dnUU7-IednZ2d@mozilla.org>	<L5-dnVJtHv4gOcrJnZ2dnUU7-UOdnZ2d@mozilla.org>	<mailman.2273.1415032025.26608.dev-apps-bugzilla@lists.mozilla.org>	<osKdnV0beZVHLcrJnZ2dnUU7-IudnZ2d@mozilla.org>	<mailman.2277.1415033615.26608.dev-apps-bugzilla@lists.mozilla.org>	<7tadnZn-05C6KcrJnZ2dnUU7-T-dnZ2d@mozilla.org> <5457B5DD.9040202@mozilla.org>
Message-ID: <5457D373.1050407@gmail.com>

Le 03. 11. 14 18:05, Gervase Markham a ?crit :
> 1) Add "release-X.Y[.Z]" tags for every bugzilla-X.Y[.Z] tag back to the
> beginning of time

I don't see the point to go "back to the beginning of time", really.
It's just a waste of time for something that is totally useless. Unless
you plan to download Bugzilla 2.12 to play with it?

LpSolit



From mcote at mozilla.com  Mon Nov  3 20:31:51 2014
From: mcote at mozilla.com (=?UTF-8?B?TWFyayBDw7R0w6k=?=)
Date: Mon, 03 Nov 2014 15:31:51 -0500
Subject: How we use Git
In-Reply-To: <mailman.2257.1415042057.26609.dev-apps-bugzilla@lists.mozilla.org>
References: <scednUcn3q1z7M7JnZ2dnUU7-WmdnZ2d@mozilla.org>	<QcqdnQbxQLJKDcrJnZ2dnUU7-aWdnZ2d@mozilla.org>	<rJudnRmMhr1jC8rJnZ2dnUU7-TGdnZ2d@mozilla.org>	<mPudnSQtn62zAcrJnZ2dnUU7-e-dnZ2d@mozilla.org>	<TuOdnUjSD_4nPMrJnZ2dnUU7-IednZ2d@mozilla.org>	<L5-dnVJtHv4gOcrJnZ2dnUU7-UOdnZ2d@mozilla.org>	<mailman.2273.1415032025.26608.dev-apps-bugzilla@lists.mozilla.org>	<osKdnV0beZVHLcrJnZ2dnUU7-IudnZ2d@mozilla.org>	<mailman.2277.1415033615.26608.dev-apps-bugzilla@lists.mozilla.org>	<7tadnZn-05C6KcrJnZ2dnUU7-T-dnZ2d@mozilla.org>	<5457B5DD.9040202@mozilla.org>
	<mailman.2257.1415042057.26609.dev-apps-bugzilla@lists.mozilla.org>
Message-ID: <OP2dnectrtCoe8rJnZ2dnUU7-b2dnZ2d@mozilla.org>

On 2014-11-03 2:11 PM, Fr?d?ric Buclin wrote:
> Le 03. 11. 14 18:05, Gervase Markham a ?crit :
>> 1) Add "release-X.Y[.Z]" tags for every bugzilla-X.Y[.Z] tag back to the
>> beginning of time
> 
> I don't see the point to go "back to the beginning of time", really.
> It's just a waste of time for something that is totally useless. Unless
> you plan to download Bugzilla 2.12 to play with it?

I'll be writing a script to do this, so it's actually easier to do them all.

Mark



_______________________________________________
dev-apps-bugzilla mailing list
dev-apps-bugzilla at lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-apps-bugzilla

From gerv at mozilla.org  Wed Nov 12 11:41:59 2014
From: gerv at mozilla.org (Gervase Markham)
Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2014 11:41:59 +0000
Subject: New Buggy graphics
Message-ID: <ttCdnVykR-Ia2v7JnZ2dnUU7-WmdnZ2d@mozilla.org>

Someone seems to have done some new (are they?) Buggy graphics in honour
of our recent vuln:
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-uMrprcFdvz4/VDQtWULsQVI/AAAAAAAAL-4/CPicnaJnrGs/s1600/bugzilla-vulnerability.gif

(From:
http://allhackersnews.com/2014/11/bug-bug-tracker-bugzilla-exposes-private-bugs.html)

Gerv
_______________________________________________
dev-apps-bugzilla mailing list
dev-apps-bugzilla at lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-apps-bugzilla


From gerv at mozilla.org  Wed Nov 12 13:23:38 2014
From: gerv at mozilla.org (Gervase Markham)
Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2014 13:23:38 +0000
Subject: How we use Git
In-Reply-To: <OP2dnectrtCoe8rJnZ2dnUU7-b2dnZ2d@mozilla.org>
References: <scednUcn3q1z7M7JnZ2dnUU7-WmdnZ2d@mozilla.org>	<QcqdnQbxQLJKDcrJnZ2dnUU7-aWdnZ2d@mozilla.org>	<rJudnRmMhr1jC8rJnZ2dnUU7-TGdnZ2d@mozilla.org>	<mPudnSQtn62zAcrJnZ2dnUU7-e-dnZ2d@mozilla.org>	<TuOdnUjSD_4nPMrJnZ2dnUU7-IednZ2d@mozilla.org>	<L5-dnVJtHv4gOcrJnZ2dnUU7-UOdnZ2d@mozilla.org>	<mailman.2273.1415032025.26608.dev-apps-bugzilla@lists.mozilla.org>	<osKdnV0beZVHLcrJnZ2dnUU7-IudnZ2d@mozilla.org>	<mailman.2277.1415033615.26608.dev-apps-bugzilla@lists.mozilla.org>	<7tadnZn-05C6KcrJnZ2dnUU7-T-dnZ2d@mozilla.org>	<5457B5DD.9040202@mozilla.org>
	<mailman.2257.1415042057.26609.dev-apps-bugzilla@lists.mozilla.org>
	<OP2dnectrtCoe8rJnZ2dnUU7-b2dnZ2d@mozilla.org>
Message-ID: <54635F5A.1040304@mozilla.org>

On 03/11/14 20:31, Mark C?t? wrote:
> I'll be writing a script to do this, so it's actually easier to do them all.

Mark: is this on your plate to do? Do you need a bug filed?

dkl: as release manager, any objections? Last chance :-)

Gerv

_______________________________________________
dev-apps-bugzilla mailing list
dev-apps-bugzilla at lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-apps-bugzilla

From theycallmefish at gmail.com  Wed Nov 12 14:38:20 2014
From: theycallmefish at gmail.com (Ryan Wilson)
Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2014 14:38:20 +0000
Subject: New Buggy graphics
References: <ttCdnVykR-Ia2v7JnZ2dnUU7-WmdnZ2d@mozilla.org>
Message-ID: <CACS7coLk-1_qn7tgo_dnpTeUA705UvBPA=VsQ2DjHo0EU9W7oA@mail.gmail.com>

I've found the image on a blog post from August of 2013

http://blog.freedomsponsors.org/freedomsponsors-bugzilla-plugin/

Not a lot of results in a reverse image search, but this seems to be the
earliest I could find.

On Wed Nov 12 2014 at 4:45:24 AM Gervase Markham <gerv at mozilla.org> wrote:

> Someone seems to have done some new (are they?) Buggy graphics in honour
> of our recent vuln:
> http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-uMrprcFdvz4/VDQtWULsQVI/
> AAAAAAAAL-4/CPicnaJnrGs/s1600/bugzilla-vulnerability.gif
>
> (From:
> http://allhackersnews.com/2014/11/bug-bug-tracker-
> bugzilla-exposes-private-bugs.html)
>
> Gerv
> _______________________________________________
> dev-apps-bugzilla mailing list
> dev-apps-bugzilla at lists.mozilla.org
> https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-apps-bugzilla
> -
> To view or change your list settings, click here:
> <http://bugzilla.org/cgi-bin/mj_wwwusr?user=theycallmefish at gmail.com>
>
_______________________________________________
dev-apps-bugzilla mailing list
dev-apps-bugzilla at lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-apps-bugzilla


From dkl at mozilla.com  Wed Nov 12 14:48:44 2014
From: dkl at mozilla.com (David Lawrence)
Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2014 09:48:44 -0500
Subject: How we use Git
In-Reply-To: <5457B5DD.9040202@mozilla.org>
References: <scednUcn3q1z7M7JnZ2dnUU7-WmdnZ2d@mozilla.org>	<QcqdnQbxQLJKDcrJnZ2dnUU7-aWdnZ2d@mozilla.org>	<rJudnRmMhr1jC8rJnZ2dnUU7-TGdnZ2d@mozilla.org>	<mPudnSQtn62zAcrJnZ2dnUU7-e-dnZ2d@mozilla.org>	<TuOdnUjSD_4nPMrJnZ2dnUU7-IednZ2d@mozilla.org>	<L5-dnVJtHv4gOcrJnZ2dnUU7-UOdnZ2d@mozilla.org>	<mailman.2273.1415032025.26608.dev-apps-bugzilla@lists.mozilla.org>	<osKdnV0beZVHLcrJnZ2dnUU7-IudnZ2d@mozilla.org>	<mailman.2277.1415033615.26608.dev-apps-bugzilla@lists.mozilla.org>	<7tadnZn-05C6KcrJnZ2dnUU7-T-dnZ2d@mozilla.org> <5457B5DD.9040202@mozilla.org>
Message-ID: <5463734C.40209@mozilla.com>

Sorry so late to the discussion. This got lost in my inbox unfortunately.

On 11/03/2014 12:05 PM, Gervase Markham wrote:
> On 03/11/14 16:58, Mark C?t? wrote:
>> Anyway, if we're all in agreement, I can go back and add release-X.Y[.Z]
>> and release-X.Y-stable tags and delete the bugzilla-stable tag (the
>> latter being the last push -f we'll hopefully ever need).
> 
> I'd like to hear from dkl as release manager first.
> 
> So here's a summary of the plan:
> 
> 1) Add "release-X.Y[.Z]" tags for every bugzilla-X.Y[.Z] tag back to the
> beginning of time

This is fine. I will just have to remember that for BZR we would still
use bugzilla-X.Y[.Z]. Would love to switch there as well but as
LpSolit mentioned, it would break legacy scripts for users most likely.
With Git it is new enough for us we can make those types of changes early on.

> 2) Add a bugzilla-X.Y-stable branch for all supported releases (4.0,
> 4.2, 4.4) pointing at the same place as the most recent release tag

Fine. But would we call this release-X.Y-stable in line with the new tag
naming? I will have to get with Mark on how this would work command wise.
For example, when the bugzilla-4.4-stable branch is created, no commits
are made to it ever. So when we release the next minor version of 4.4, then
we delete the old bugzilla-4.4-stable branch completely and create the new
one in the new location. Is that basically it?

> 3) Delete the bugzilla-stable tag

Also fine.

> 4) Update the release process documentation:
>    * Change the name of the tag to be created at the release point
>    * Add "Create or update the release-X.Y-stable branch" as a step
>    * Remove anything about updating the bugzilla-stable tag

I will do that once I figure out the command sequence.

> 5) Update the new docs to use the simple git commands outlined up-thread

Sounds good.

dkl

-- 
David Lawrence
dkl at mozilla.com


From gerv at mozilla.org  Wed Nov 12 15:02:07 2014
From: gerv at mozilla.org (Gervase Markham)
Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2014 15:02:07 +0000
Subject: How we use Git
In-Reply-To: <mailman.3197.1415803783.26609.dev-apps-bugzilla@lists.mozilla.org>
References: <scednUcn3q1z7M7JnZ2dnUU7-WmdnZ2d@mozilla.org>	<QcqdnQbxQLJKDcrJnZ2dnUU7-aWdnZ2d@mozilla.org>	<rJudnRmMhr1jC8rJnZ2dnUU7-TGdnZ2d@mozilla.org>	<mPudnSQtn62zAcrJnZ2dnUU7-e-dnZ2d@mozilla.org>	<TuOdnUjSD_4nPMrJnZ2dnUU7-IednZ2d@mozilla.org>	<L5-dnVJtHv4gOcrJnZ2dnUU7-UOdnZ2d@mozilla.org>	<mailman.2273.1415032025.26608.dev-apps-bugzilla@lists.mozilla.org>	<osKdnV0beZVHLcrJnZ2dnUU7-IudnZ2d@mozilla.org>	<mailman.2277.1415033615.26608.dev-apps-bugzilla@lists.mozilla.org>	<7tadnZn-05C6KcrJnZ2dnUU7-T-dnZ2d@mozilla.org>	<5457B5DD.9040202@mozilla.org>
	<mailman.3197.1415803783.26609.dev-apps-bugzilla@lists.mozilla.org>
Message-ID: <EpmdnQQA_qTt6_7JnZ2dnUU7-aGdnZ2d@mozilla.org>

On 12/11/14 14:48, David Lawrence wrote:
>> 2) Add a bugzilla-X.Y-stable branch for all supported releases (4.0,
>> 4.2, 4.4) pointing at the same place as the most recent release tag
> 
> Fine. But would we call this release-X.Y-stable in line with the new tag
> naming?

I think not, because they are branches, not tags, and so they "move".
But see below - I think there's a misunderstanding here.

> I will have to get with Mark on how this would work command wise.
> For example, when the bugzilla-4.4-stable branch is created, no commits
> are made to it ever. So when we release the next minor version of 4.4, then
> we delete the old bugzilla-4.4-stable branch completely and create the new
> one in the new location. Is that basically it?

No. You would merge the "4.4" branch to the "bugzilla-4.4-stable"
branch. This would always be a fast-forward merge because the
"bugzilla-4.4-stable" branch would never have independent checkins, it
would just accept merges from 4.4.

The commands would be:

<finalise 4.4.XX release on branch "4.4">
git checkout bugzilla-4.4-stable
git merge 4.4
git commit

(I believe.)

Then, people could update to "bugzilla-4.4-stable" and always get
exactly the latest stable release. Whereas "4.4" bumbles along one
commit at a time, "bugzilla-4.4-stable" jumps along from release to release.

Does it now make more sense why it's called "bugzilla-4.4-stable" rather
than "release-4.4-stable"? Calling it "release-" sort of suggests it's a
particular release and won't change. But that's not what happens.

Gerv
_______________________________________________
dev-apps-bugzilla mailing list
dev-apps-bugzilla at lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-apps-bugzilla


From glob at mozilla.com  Wed Nov 12 16:10:35 2014
From: glob at mozilla.com (Byron Jones)
Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2014 00:10:35 +0800
Subject: New Buggy graphics
In-Reply-To: <CACS7coLk-1_qn7tgo_dnpTeUA705UvBPA=VsQ2DjHo0EU9W7oA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <ttCdnVykR-Ia2v7JnZ2dnUU7-WmdnZ2d@mozilla.org> <CACS7coLk-1_qn7tgo_dnpTeUA705UvBPA=VsQ2DjHo0EU9W7oA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <5463867B.2090706@mozilla.com>

these aren't new; they are poses done by dave shea.
you can see them on 
http://www.justdave.net/dave/2008/08/28/what-do-you-want-to-see-while-you-wait/

there are svg and eps versions of those poses kicking around somewhere..


Ryan Wilson wrote:
> I've found the image on a blog post from August of 2013
>
> http://blog.freedomsponsors.org/freedomsponsors-bugzilla-plugin/
>
> Not a lot of results in a reverse image search, but this seems to be the
> earliest I could find.
>
> On Wed Nov 12 2014 at 4:45:24 AM Gervase Markham<gerv at mozilla.org>  wrote:
>
>> Someone seems to have done some new (are they?) Buggy graphics in honour
>> of our recent vuln:
>> http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-uMrprcFdvz4/VDQtWULsQVI/
>> AAAAAAAAL-4/CPicnaJnrGs/s1600/bugzilla-vulnerability.gif
>>
>> (From:
>> http://allhackersnews.com/2014/11/bug-bug-tracker-
>> bugzilla-exposes-private-bugs.html)
>>
>> Gerv
>> _______________________________________________
>> dev-apps-bugzilla mailing list
>> dev-apps-bugzilla at lists.mozilla.org
>> https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-apps-bugzilla
>> -
>> To view or change your list settings, click here:
>> <http://bugzilla.org/cgi-bin/mj_wwwusr?user=theycallmefish at gmail.com>
>>
> _______________________________________________
> dev-apps-bugzilla mailing list
> dev-apps-bugzilla at lists.mozilla.org
> https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-apps-bugzilla
> -
> To view or change your list settings, click here:
> <http://bugzilla.org/cgi-bin/mj_wwwusr?user=glob at mozilla.com>


-- 
byron jones - :glob - bugzilla.mozilla.org team -

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.bugzilla.org/pipermail/developers/attachments/20141113/31ab7c9e/attachment.html>

From rsbecker at nexbridge.com  Wed Nov 12 23:18:58 2014
From: rsbecker at nexbridge.com (Randall S. Becker)
Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2014 18:18:58 -0500
Subject: How we use Git
In-Reply-To: <EpmdnQQA_qTt6_7JnZ2dnUU7-aGdnZ2d@mozilla.org>
References: <scednUcn3q1z7M7JnZ2dnUU7-WmdnZ2d@mozilla.org>	<QcqdnQbxQLJKDcrJnZ2dnUU7-aWdnZ2d@mozilla.org>	<rJudnRmMhr1jC8rJnZ2dnUU7-TGdnZ2d@mozilla.org>	<mPudnSQtn62zAcrJnZ2dnUU7-e-dnZ2d@mozilla.org>	<TuOdnUjSD_4nPMrJnZ2dnUU7-IednZ2d@mozilla.org>	<L5-dnVJtHv4gOcrJnZ2dnUU7-UOdnZ2d@mozilla.org>	<mailman.2273.1415032025.26608.dev-apps-bugzilla@lists.mozilla.org>	<osKdnV0beZVHLcrJnZ2dnUU7-IudnZ2d@mozilla.org>	<mailman.2277.1415033615.26608.dev-apps-bugzilla@lists.mozilla.org>	<7tadnZn-05C6KcrJnZ2dnUU7-T-dnZ2d@mozilla.org>	<5457B5DD.9040202@mozilla.org>	<mailman.3197.1415803783.26609.dev-apps-bugzilla@lists.mozilla.org> <EpmdnQQA_qTt6_7JnZ2dnUU7-aGdnZ2d@mozilla.org>
Message-ID: <000c01cffecf$09ee47d0$1dcad770$@nexbridge.com>

On: November 12, 2014 10:02 AM Gervase Markham wrote:
>> I will have to get with Mark on how this would work command wise.
>> For example, when the bugzilla-4.4-stable branch is created, no commits
>> are made to it ever. So when we release the next minor version of 4.4,
then
>> we delete the old bugzilla-4.4-stable branch completely and create the
new
>> one in the new location. Is that basically it?

>No. You would merge the "4.4" branch to the "bugzilla-4.4-stable"
>branch. This would always be a fast-forward merge because the
>"bugzilla-4.4-stable" branch would never have independent checkins, it
>would just accept merges from 4.4.

This does make sense from a git standpoint. Naming something "release-X"
when it moves ends up being pretty counterintuitive. Having a well-known
integration branch is a very common approach.

>git checkout bugzilla-4.4-stable
>git merge 4.4
>git commit

There will be a push upstream, also, to publicize. The commit is generally
local and I would not suggest ever doing a merge/commit directly on the
repository. I mean "ever". If anything goes wrong, you want the opportunity
to fix it.



From gerv at mozilla.org  Thu Nov 13 14:12:03 2014
From: gerv at mozilla.org (Gervase Markham)
Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2014 14:12:03 +0000
Subject: How we use Git
In-Reply-To: <mailman.3269.1415834460.26609.dev-apps-bugzilla@lists.mozilla.org>
References: <scednUcn3q1z7M7JnZ2dnUU7-WmdnZ2d@mozilla.org>	<QcqdnQbxQLJKDcrJnZ2dnUU7-aWdnZ2d@mozilla.org>	<rJudnRmMhr1jC8rJnZ2dnUU7-TGdnZ2d@mozilla.org>	<mPudnSQtn62zAcrJnZ2dnUU7-e-dnZ2d@mozilla.org>	<TuOdnUjSD_4nPMrJnZ2dnUU7-IednZ2d@mozilla.org>	<L5-dnVJtHv4gOcrJnZ2dnUU7-UOdnZ2d@mozilla.org>	<mailman.2273.1415032025.26608.dev-apps-bugzilla@lists.mozilla.org>	<osKdnV0beZVHLcrJnZ2dnUU7-IudnZ2d@mozilla.org>	<mailman.2277.1415033615.26608.dev-apps-bugzilla@lists.mozilla.org>	<7tadnZn-05C6KcrJnZ2dnUU7-T-dnZ2d@mozilla.org>	<5457B5DD.9040202@mozilla.org>	<mailman.3197.1415803783.26609.dev-apps-bugzilla@lists.mozilla.org>	<EpmdnQQA_qTt6_7JnZ2dnUU7-aGdnZ2d@mozilla.org>
	<mailman.3269.1415834460.26609.dev-apps-bugzilla@lists.mozilla.org>
Message-ID: <QeWdnTj8AOOpIfnJnZ2dnUU7-Q-dnZ2d@mozilla.org>

On 12/11/14 23:18, Randall S. Becker wrote:
> This does make sense from a git standpoint. Naming something "release-X"
> when it moves ends up being pretty counterintuitive. Having a well-known
> integration branch is a very common approach.
> 
>> git checkout bugzilla-4.4-stable
>> git merge 4.4
>> git commit
> 
> There will be a push upstream, also, to publicize. 

Yes, of course. :-)

Gerv

_______________________________________________
dev-apps-bugzilla mailing list
dev-apps-bugzilla at lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-apps-bugzilla


From mcote at mozilla.com  Fri Nov 14 19:08:53 2014
From: mcote at mozilla.com (=?UTF-8?B?TWFyayBDw7R0w6k=?=)
Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2014 14:08:53 -0500
Subject: How we use Git
In-Reply-To: <54635F5A.1040304@mozilla.org>
References: <scednUcn3q1z7M7JnZ2dnUU7-WmdnZ2d@mozilla.org>	<QcqdnQbxQLJKDcrJnZ2dnUU7-aWdnZ2d@mozilla.org>	<rJudnRmMhr1jC8rJnZ2dnUU7-TGdnZ2d@mozilla.org>	<mPudnSQtn62zAcrJnZ2dnUU7-e-dnZ2d@mozilla.org>	<TuOdnUjSD_4nPMrJnZ2dnUU7-IednZ2d@mozilla.org>	<L5-dnVJtHv4gOcrJnZ2dnUU7-UOdnZ2d@mozilla.org>	<mailman.2273.1415032025.26608.dev-apps-bugzilla@lists.mozilla.org>	<osKdnV0beZVHLcrJnZ2dnUU7-IudnZ2d@mozilla.org>	<mailman.2277.1415033615.26608.dev-apps-bugzilla@lists.mozilla.org>	<7tadnZn-05C6KcrJnZ2dnUU7-T-dnZ2d@mozilla.org>	<5457B5DD.9040202@mozilla.org>
	<mailman.2257.1415042057.26609.dev-apps-bugzilla@lists.mozilla.org>
	<OP2dnectrtCoe8rJnZ2dnUU7-b2dnZ2d@mozilla.org>
	<54635F5A.1040304@mozilla.org>
Message-ID: <na6dnSUndcbYzvvJnZ2dnUU7-fmdnZ2d@mozilla.org>

On 2014-11-12 8:23 AM, Gervase Markham wrote:
> On 03/11/14 20:31, Mark C?t? wrote:
>> I'll be writing a script to do this, so it's actually easier to do them all.
> 
> Mark: is this on your plate to do? Do you need a bug filed?
> 
> dkl: as release manager, any objections? Last chance :-)
> 
> Gerv

Yes, sorry for the delay.  I filed bug 1099284 with all the steps; I'll
get to it soon.

Mark
_______________________________________________
dev-apps-bugzilla mailing list
dev-apps-bugzilla at lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-apps-bugzilla

From gerv at mozilla.org  Thu Nov 20 14:48:48 2014
From: gerv at mozilla.org (Gervase Markham)
Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2014 14:48:48 +0000
Subject: Warning when checking out some extension repos
Message-ID: <zZqdnRjRzPnMYvDJnZ2dnUU7-LudnZ2d@mozilla.org>

Dear Bugzilla team,

If you attempt to check out some of our extension repos, such as:

git clone ssh://gitolite3 at git.mozilla.org/bugzilla/extensions/SiteMap.git

you will get this alarming warning:
"Warning: remote HEAD refers to nonexistent ref, unable to checkout"
and you will get what seems like an empty directory.

The repo is actually all there; the error is because these repos don't
have a master branch, and by default git attempts to check it out once
it's downloaded the repo. Do:

git branch -a

and then

git checkout remotes/origin/4.0

(or whatever the name of a branch is)

to get some code.

You could then create a new master branch (presumably based on the most
recent branch or at another sensible spot) and push it so that people
don't have this problem in the future:

git checkout -b master
git push origin master

THBAPSA.

Gerv
_______________________________________________
dev-apps-bugzilla mailing list
dev-apps-bugzilla at lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-apps-bugzilla


From gerv at mozilla.org  Tue Nov 25 11:08:07 2014
From: gerv at mozilla.org (Gervase Markham)
Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2014 11:08:07 +0000
Subject: How we use Git, part 2
Message-ID: <MdCdnbynyYiF_unJnZ2dnUU7-KWdnZ2d@mozilla.org>

Bugzilla developers with checkin rights may want to create topic
branches in git for development of significant patches. For example, if
I had thought about it, I would probably have done the new docs work
this way, rather than forking on github.

Based on something I read elsewhere, can I propose we have a convention
that such a branch is named with the bug number and the person's nick,
so we know who to contact about a branch?

So my big patch, that glob is in the middle of reviewing, to split login
names from email addresses would have branch name "218917-gerv".

Does that make sense?

Gerv
_______________________________________________
dev-apps-bugzilla mailing list
dev-apps-bugzilla at lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-apps-bugzilla


From dkl at mozilla.com  Tue Nov 25 14:22:15 2014
From: dkl at mozilla.com (David Lawrence)
Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2014 09:22:15 -0500
Subject: How we use Git, part 2
In-Reply-To: <MdCdnbynyYiF_unJnZ2dnUU7-KWdnZ2d@mozilla.org>
References: <MdCdnbynyYiF_unJnZ2dnUU7-KWdnZ2d@mozilla.org>
Message-ID: <54749097.4090607@mozilla.com>

Sounds fine to me. I would even go a little further and name it bug-218917-gerv or
feature-218917-gerv. For people who want to contribute that do not have checkin
rights, there is always github as well and they can use similar naming there.

dkl

On 11/25/2014 06:08 AM, Gervase Markham wrote:
> Bugzilla developers with checkin rights may want to create topic
> branches in git for development of significant patches. For example, if
> I had thought about it, I would probably have done the new docs work
> this way, rather than forking on github.
> 
> Based on something I read elsewhere, can I propose we have a convention
> that such a branch is named with the bug number and the person's nick,
> so we know who to contact about a branch?
> 
> So my big patch, that glob is in the middle of reviewing, to split login
> names from email addresses would have branch name "218917-gerv".
> 
> Does that make sense?
> 
> Gerv
> _______________________________________________
> dev-apps-bugzilla mailing list
> dev-apps-bugzilla at lists.mozilla.org
> https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-apps-bugzilla
> -
> To view or change your list settings, click here:
> <http://bugzilla.org/cgi-bin/mj_wwwusr?user=dkl at mozilla.com>
> 

-- 
David Lawrence
dkl at mozilla.com


From gerv at mozilla.org  Tue Nov 25 14:30:01 2014
From: gerv at mozilla.org (Gervase Markham)
Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2014 14:30:01 +0000
Subject: How we use Git, part 2
In-Reply-To: <54749097.4090607@mozilla.com>
References: <MdCdnbynyYiF_unJnZ2dnUU7-KWdnZ2d@mozilla.org> <54749097.4090607@mozilla.com>
Message-ID: <54749269.60304@mozilla.org>

On 25/11/14 14:22, David Lawrence wrote:
> Sounds fine to me. I would even go a little further and name it bug-218917-gerv or
> feature-218917-gerv. For people who want to contribute that do not have checkin
> rights, there is always github as well and they can use similar naming there.

When would you choose "bug" and when "feature"? How is expressing that
distinction in the branch name useful? Or do you just think it reads better?

Gerv


From rsbecker at nexbridge.com  Wed Nov 26 00:04:24 2014
From: rsbecker at nexbridge.com (Randall S. Becker)
Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2014 19:04:24 -0500
Subject: How we use Git, part 2
In-Reply-To: <54749269.60304@mozilla.org>
References: <MdCdnbynyYiF_unJnZ2dnUU7-KWdnZ2d@mozilla.org> <54749097.4090607@mozilla.com> <54749269.60304@mozilla.org>
Message-ID: <000f01d0090c$8b538af0$a1faa0d0$@nexbridge.com>

On: 25/11/15 09:30 Gervase Markham wrote:
>On 25/11/14 14:22, David Lawrence wrote:
>> Sounds fine to me. I would even go a little further and name it 
>> bug-218917-gerv or feature-218917-gerv. For people who want to 
>> contribute that do not have checkin rights, there is always github as well and they can use similar naming there.
>When would you choose "bug" and when "feature"? How is expressing that distinction in the branch name useful?
>Or do you just think it reads better?

I prefer task_218917_gerv, to be perfectly frank. For most commits, I put in the Bugzilla URL anyway (Mylyn does it automagically), so looking up the details of the bug or feature is really not far. I do not really like a purely numeric prefix, as this can be a little confusing between branches and abbreviated git versions if you are looking at change trees. Having some standard prefix that says "this branch is something I'm doing because I'm changing something deliberately" is a good visual clue in branch management - as opposed to "this branch is here because I'm trying to piece things in my repository back together" or "we're on the road to a release". I realize this is close to the realm of variable name coding standards, and probably a nano-quibble, but having a meaningful prefix, for me, is desirable.

Just my $0.016,
Randall



From mcote at bugzilla.org  Wed Nov 26 01:09:31 2014
From: mcote at bugzilla.org (=?UTF-8?B?TWFyayBDw7R0w6k=?=)
Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2014 20:09:31 -0500
Subject: Meeting on 26 November 2014 is an hour earlier for some folks
Message-ID: <ev2dnewrNeXRtejJnZ2dnUU7-I-dnZ2d@mozilla.org>

Just a (rather late) reminder that the next Bugzilla Projec meeting, in
just over 12 hours, is most likely an hour earlier for people in regions
that observe daylight savings time, since we peg the meetings to UTC.
You can find the time in your time zone at [1].

Mark

[1] http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?iso=20141126T1400

-- 
Mark C?t?
Assistant Project Lead, Bugzilla
_______________________________________________
dev-apps-bugzilla mailing list
dev-apps-bugzilla at lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-apps-bugzilla

From mcote at bugzilla.org  Wed Nov 26 01:32:05 2014
From: mcote at bugzilla.org (=?UTF-8?B?TWFyayBDw7R0w6k=?=)
Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2014 20:32:05 -0500
Subject: Meeting on 26 November 2014 is an hour earlier *or later* for some
	folks
In-Reply-To: <ev2dnewrNeXRtejJnZ2dnUU7-I-dnZ2d@mozilla.org>
References: <ev2dnewrNeXRtejJnZ2dnUU7-I-dnZ2d@mozilla.org>
Message-ID: <9JOdneQiaLwLsOjJnZ2dnUU7-c2dnZ2d@mozilla.org>

Of course, it could also be an hour later, if you live in the southern
hemisphere and observe DST.  Apologies for my
northern-hemisphere-centric-ness!

Mark


On 2014-11-25 8:09 PM, Mark C?t? wrote:
> Just a (rather late) reminder that the next Bugzilla Projec meeting, in
> just over 12 hours, is most likely an hour earlier for people in regions
> that observe daylight savings time, since we peg the meetings to UTC.
> You can find the time in your time zone at [1].
> 
> Mark
> 
> [1] http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?iso=20141126T1400
> 


-- 
Mark C?t?
Assistant Project Lead, Bugzilla
_______________________________________________
dev-apps-bugzilla mailing list
dev-apps-bugzilla at lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-apps-bugzilla

From gerv at mozilla.org  Wed Nov 26 10:18:55 2014
From: gerv at mozilla.org (Gervase Markham)
Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2014 10:18:55 +0000
Subject: How we use Git, part 2
In-Reply-To: <000f01d0090c$8b538af0$a1faa0d0$@nexbridge.com>
References: <MdCdnbynyYiF_unJnZ2dnUU7-KWdnZ2d@mozilla.org> <54749097.4090607@mozilla.com> <54749269.60304@mozilla.org> <000f01d0090c$8b538af0$a1faa0d0$@nexbridge.com>
Message-ID: <5475A90F.6020208@mozilla.org>

On 26/11/14 00:04, Randall S. Becker wrote:
> On: 25/11/15 09:30 Gervase Markham wrote:
>> On 25/11/14 14:22, David Lawrence wrote:
>>> Sounds fine to me. I would even go a little further and name it 
>>> bug-218917-gerv or feature-218917-gerv. For people who want to 
>>> contribute that do not have checkin rights, there is always
>>> github as well and they can use similar naming there.
>> When would you choose "bug" and when "feature"? How is expressing
>> that distinction in the branch name useful? Or do you just think it
>> reads better?
> 
> I prefer task_218917_gerv, to be perfectly frank. 

My question is, why have a prefix at all? If it's always the same, it
just makes branch names unnecessarily longer. If it's different, what is
the process for choosing the different prefixes?

> For most commits, I
> put in the Bugzilla URL anyway (Mylyn does it automagically), so
> looking up the details of the bug or feature is really not far. 

I still think there is value in being able to execute "git branch", and
see a list of current branches and which bugs they relate to.

> I do
> not really like a purely numeric prefix, as this can be a little
> confusing between branches and abbreviated git versions if you are
> looking at change trees. 

OK, there's some merit in that. But why not just go with "b" (for "bug")
as the prefix to solve that problem?

Gerv


From gerv at mozilla.org  Fri Nov 28 17:04:59 2014
From: gerv at mozilla.org (Gervase Markham)
Date: Fri, 28 Nov 2014 17:04:59 +0000
Subject: Landfill cleanup
Message-ID: <uomdnRe9ZICmNuXJnZ2dnUU7-a2dnZ2d@mozilla.org>

I've done a bunch of cleanup on landfill. I have:

* moved all Bugzilla installs except the front page ones to
  /var/www/html/archive, which is not accessible by the webserver

* cleaned up the /var/www/html/ directory, removing cruft and dead tools

* backed up all MySQL databases to /root/db-backup/ then deleted all
  the ones except those for the front page installs

* disabled no-longer-useful cron jobs in /etc/cron.d/bugzilla.cron

* disabled lots of users who haven't logged in since Feb 2012

Let me know if I broke anything.

Gerv
_______________________________________________
dev-apps-bugzilla mailing list
dev-apps-bugzilla at lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-apps-bugzilla


From lpsolit at gmail.com  Fri Nov 28 17:49:06 2014
From: lpsolit at gmail.com (=?windows-1252?Q?Fr=E9d=E9ric_Buclin?=)
Date: Fri, 28 Nov 2014 18:49:06 +0100
Subject: Landfill cleanup
In-Reply-To: <uomdnRe9ZICmNuXJnZ2dnUU7-a2dnZ2d@mozilla.org>
References: <uomdnRe9ZICmNuXJnZ2dnUU7-a2dnZ2d@mozilla.org>
Message-ID: <5478B592.50709@gmail.com>

Le 28. 11. 14 18:04, Gervase Markham a ?crit :
> * moved all Bugzilla installs except the front page ones to
>   /var/www/html/archive, which is not accessible by the webserver

I don't see the point to keep them in archive. Those should be deleted,
including their corresponding DB.


> * cleaned up the /var/www/html/ directory, removing cruft and dead tools

If by "dead tools" you mean tools/installs.cgi, I don't see why you
removed it. It was working fine, and was restricted to LDAP users. Now I
see it's gone.


> * backed up all MySQL databases to /root/db-backup/ then deleted all
>   the ones except those for the front page installs

Obsolete ones should be removed entirely, see above.


LpSolit



From gerv at mozilla.org  Fri Nov 28 19:43:12 2014
From: gerv at mozilla.org (Gervase Markham)
Date: Fri, 28 Nov 2014 19:43:12 +0000
Subject: Landfill cleanup
In-Reply-To: <5478B592.50709@gmail.com>
References: <uomdnRe9ZICmNuXJnZ2dnUU7-a2dnZ2d@mozilla.org> <5478B592.50709@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <5478D050.4090305@mozilla.org>

On 28/11/14 17:49, Fr?d?ric Buclin wrote:
> Le 28. 11. 14 18:04, Gervase Markham a ?crit :
>> * moved all Bugzilla installs except the front page ones to
>>   /var/www/html/archive, which is not accessible by the webserver
> 
> I don't see the point to keep them in archive. Those should be deleted,
> including their corresponding DB.

They will be eventually; I kept them just in case I made a mistake...

>> * cleaned up the /var/www/html/ directory, removing cruft and dead tools
> 
> If by "dead tools" you mean tools/installs.cgi, I don't see why you
> removed it. It was working fine, and was restricted to LDAP users. Now I
> see it's gone.

...like this one :-) No problem, we can put it back.

>> * backed up all MySQL databases to /root/db-backup/ then deleted all
>>   the ones except those for the front page installs
> 
> Obsolete ones should be removed entirely, see above.

We aren't short of disk space.

Gerv



From gerv at mozilla.org  Sat Nov 29 10:10:18 2014
From: gerv at mozilla.org (Gervase Markham)
Date: Sat, 29 Nov 2014 10:10:18 +0000
Subject: Landfill cleanup
In-Reply-To: <5478D050.4090305@mozilla.org>
References: <uomdnRe9ZICmNuXJnZ2dnUU7-a2dnZ2d@mozilla.org> <5478B592.50709@gmail.com> <5478D050.4090305@mozilla.org>
Message-ID: <54799B8A.7010202@mozilla.org>

On 28/11/14 19:43, Gervase Markham wrote:
>> If by "dead tools" you mean tools/installs.cgi, I don't see why you
>> removed it. It was working fine, and was restricted to LDAP users. Now I
>> see it's gone.
> 
> ...like this one :-) No problem, we can put it back.

Fixed.

Gerv