[Xerte-dev] Re: GitHub and Workflows

[Smith, John]

Sounds all good to me...

Regards,

John Smith
Learning Technologist
School of Health & Life Sciences
Glasgow Caledonian University

From: xerte-dev-bounces at lists.nottingham.ac.uk [mailto:xerte-dev-bounces at lists.nottingham.ac.uk] On Behalf Of Julian Tenney
Sent: Thursday, September 05, 2013 2:40 PM
To: For Xerte technical developers (xerte-dev at lists.nottingham.ac.uk)
Subject: [Xerte-dev] GitHub and Workflows

Hi,

I think we've got the SVN migrated over to Git Hub with all the history, branches etc, which is great. We need to have some discussion about workflow, and I want to suggest gitflow as a good workflow to adopt. Information can be found here http://nvie.com/posts/a-successful-git-branching-model/ and elsewhere (here: https://www.atlassian.com/git/workflows for example).

I like it for several reasons:


-          The 'master' branch is always production quality released code

-          Small developments (trivial) can be undertaken directly in 'develop'

-          Larger developments can be undertaken in braches taken from 'develop', and then merged back into develop once complete...

-          ...testing of develop can then be undertaken before we make a new release number.

See the information for more details. Does this seem sensible and agreeable to everyone?

There are two other things I'd like us to work towards, again subject to some discussion between us:

Using Tickets for Issues and New Features:

-          Using some ticketing system to record bugs to be fixed, new features to be developed, because we keep losing these;

-          Using those tickets as a way of grouping work into sprints towards a new release;

-          Could be trac, could be github, open to suggestions;

A better means of testing the software rather than the hit and hope method we currently employ:

-          Open to suggestions here?

-          Probably starts with a list of manual tests to work through?

-          Possibly includes automation (Selenium?)

-          UnitTesting probably a very long term goal, might not even be possible?

So my vision would be that we log tickets, we use that list of tickets as a big to-do list; we create a smaller current to-do list from it for the next release; we do the development a la gitflow; changes get pushed to develop and tested; new version released. It sounds good in theory at any rate, it will require a bit more discipline amongst us, but I think the benefits are worth it. I'd very much appreciate your views...

Thanks,

Julian





This message and any attachment are intended solely for the addressee and may contain confidential information. If you have received this message in error, please send it back to me, and immediately delete it.   Please do not use, copy or disclose the information contained in this message or in any attachment.  Any views or opinions expressed by the author of this email do not necessarily reflect the views of the University of Nottingham.

This message has been checked for viruses but the contents of an attachment may still contain software viruses which could damage your computer system, you are advised to perform your own checks. Email communications with the University of Nottingham may be monitored as permitted by UK legislation.


Glasgow Caledonian University is a registered Scottish charity, number SC021474

Winner: Times Higher Education's Widening Participation Initiative of the Year 2009 and Herald Society's Education Initiative of the Year 2009.
http://www.gcu.ac.uk/newsevents/news/bycategory/theuniversity/1/name,6219,en.html

Winner: Times Higher Education's Outstanding Support for Early Career Researchers of the Year 2010, GCU as a lead with Universities Scotland partners.
http://www.gcu.ac.uk/newsevents/news/bycategory/theuniversity/1/name,15691,en.html
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.nottingham.ac.uk/pipermail/xerte-dev/attachments/20130905/022429c1/attachment-0001.html>