[Xerte-dev] Re: GitHub and Workflows

[Tom Reijnders]

Hi,

I am in the process of modifying the build scripts to use github in 
stead of svn.

And I noticed that Nicodem committed to master yesterday, so I've got a 
question given the workflow mentioned below:

1. Will we do hotfixes on released branches, i.e. on master and 2.0?
2. What shall we put up on the community website? What is the 
equivalent  to the svn trunk. master or develop, i.e. what is the basis 
for 'unstable'?

Regards,

Tom

Op 5-9-2013 15:39, Julian Tenney schreef:
>
> 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.
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Xerte-dev mailing list
> Xerte-dev at lists.nottingham.ac.uk
> http://lists.nottingham.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/xerte-dev

-- 
--

Tom Reijnders
TOR Informatica
Chopinlaan 27
5242HM Rosmalen
Tel: 073 5226191
Fax: 073 5226196

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.nottingham.ac.uk/pipermail/xerte-dev/attachments/20130906/9b7ce71c/attachment.html>