"Fossies" - the Fresh Open Source Software Archive

Member "git-2.23.0.windows.1/Documentation/howto/maintain-git.txt" (16 Aug 2019, 16714 Bytes) of package /windows/misc/git-2.23.0.windows.1.zip:

As a special service "Fossies" has tried to format the requested text file into HTML format (style: standard) with prefixed line numbers. Alternatively you can here view or download the uninterpreted source code file.

    1 From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
    2 Date: Wed, 21 Nov 2007 16:32:55 -0800
    3 Subject: Addendum to "MaintNotes"
    4 Abstract: Imagine that Git development is racing along as usual, when our friendly
    5  neighborhood maintainer is struck down by a wayward bus. Out of the
    6  hordes of suckers (loyal developers), you have been tricked (chosen) to
    7  step up as the new maintainer. This howto will show you "how to" do it.
    8 Content-type: text/asciidoc
   10 How to maintain Git
   11 ===================
   13 Activities
   14 ----------
   16 The maintainer's Git time is spent on three activities.
   18  - Communication (45%)
   20    Mailing list discussions on general design, fielding user
   21    questions, diagnosing bug reports; reviewing, commenting on,
   22    suggesting alternatives to, and rejecting patches.
   24  - Integration (50%)
   26    Applying new patches from the contributors while spotting and
   27    correcting minor mistakes, shuffling the integration and
   28    testing branches, pushing the results out, cutting the
   29    releases, and making announcements.
   31  - Own development (5%)
   33    Scratching my own itch and sending proposed patch series out.
   35 The Policy
   36 ----------
   38 The policy on Integration is informally mentioned in "A Note
   39 from the maintainer" message, which is periodically posted to
   40 this mailing list after each feature release is made.
   42  - Feature releases are numbered as vX.Y.0 and are meant to
   43    contain bugfixes and enhancements in any area, including
   44    functionality, performance and usability, without regression.
   46  - One release cycle for a feature release is expected to last for
   47    eight to ten weeks.
   49  - Maintenance releases are numbered as vX.Y.Z and are meant
   50    to contain only bugfixes for the corresponding vX.Y.0 feature
   51    release and earlier maintenance releases vX.Y.W (W < Z).
   53  - 'master' branch is used to prepare for the next feature
   54    release. In other words, at some point, the tip of 'master'
   55    branch is tagged with vX.Y.0.
   57  - 'maint' branch is used to prepare for the next maintenance
   58    release.  After the feature release vX.Y.0 is made, the tip
   59    of 'maint' branch is set to that release, and bugfixes will
   60    accumulate on the branch, and at some point, the tip of the
   61    branch is tagged with vX.Y.1, vX.Y.2, and so on.
   63  - 'next' branch is used to publish changes (both enhancements
   64    and fixes) that (1) have worthwhile goal, (2) are in a fairly
   65    good shape suitable for everyday use, (3) but have not yet
   66    demonstrated to be regression free.  New changes are tested
   67    in 'next' before merged to 'master'.
   69  - 'pu' branch is used to publish other proposed changes that do
   70    not yet pass the criteria set for 'next'.
   72  - The tips of 'master' and 'maint' branches will not be rewound to
   73    allow people to build their own customization on top of them.
   74    Early in a new development cycle, 'next' is rewound to the tip of
   75    'master' once, but otherwise it will not be rewound until the end
   76    of the cycle.
   78  - Usually 'master' contains all of 'maint' and 'next' contains all
   79    of 'master'.  'pu' contains all the topics merged to 'next', but
   80    is rebuilt directly on 'master'.
   82  - The tip of 'master' is meant to be more stable than any
   83    tagged releases, and the users are encouraged to follow it.
   85  - The 'next' branch is where new action takes place, and the
   86    users are encouraged to test it so that regressions and bugs
   87    are found before new topics are merged to 'master'.
   89 Note that before v1.9.0 release, the version numbers used to be
   90 structured slightly differently.  vX.Y.Z were feature releases while
   91 vX.Y.Z.W were maintenance releases for vX.Y.Z.
   94 A Typical Git Day
   95 -----------------
   97 A typical Git day for the maintainer implements the above policy
   98 by doing the following:
  100  - Scan mailing list.  Respond with review comments, suggestions
  101    etc.  Kibitz.  Collect potentially usable patches from the
  102    mailing list.  Patches about a single topic go to one mailbox (I
  103    read my mail in Gnus, and type \C-o to save/append messages in
  104    files in mbox format).
  106  - Write his own patches to address issues raised on the list but
  107    nobody has stepped up solving.  Send it out just like other
  108    contributors do, and pick them up just like patches from other
  109    contributors (see above).
  111  - Review the patches in the saved mailboxes.  Edit proposed log
  112    message for typofixes and clarifications, and add Acks
  113    collected from the list.  Edit patch to incorporate "Oops,
  114    that should have been like this" fixes from the discussion.
  116  - Classify the collected patches and handle 'master' and
  117    'maint' updates:
  119    - Obviously correct fixes that pertain to the tip of 'maint'
  120      are directly applied to 'maint'.
  122    - Obviously correct fixes that pertain to the tip of 'master'
  123      are directly applied to 'master'.
  125    - Other topics are not handled in this step.
  127    This step is done with "git am".
  129      $ git checkout master    ;# or "git checkout maint"
  130      $ git am -sc3 mailbox
  131      $ make test
  133    In practice, almost no patch directly goes to 'master' or
  134    'maint'.
  136  - Review the last issue of "What's cooking" message, review the
  137    topics ready for merging (topic->master and topic->maint).  Use
  138    "Meta/cook -w" script (where Meta/ contains a checkout of the
  139    'todo' branch) to aid this step.
  141    And perform the merge.  Use "Meta/Reintegrate -e" script (see
  142    later) to aid this step.
  144      $ Meta/cook -w last-issue-of-whats-cooking.mbox
  146      $ git checkout master    ;# or "git checkout maint"
  147      $ echo ai/topic | Meta/Reintegrate -e ;# "git merge ai/topic"
  148      $ git log -p ORIG_HEAD.. ;# final review
  149      $ git diff ORIG_HEAD..   ;# final review
  150      $ make test              ;# final review
  152  - Handle the remaining patches:
  154    - Anything unobvious that is applicable to 'master' (in other
  155      words, does not depend on anything that is still in 'next'
  156      and not in 'master') is applied to a new topic branch that
  157      is forked from the tip of 'master'.  This includes both
  158      enhancements and unobvious fixes to 'master'.  A topic
  159      branch is named as ai/topic where "ai" is two-letter string
  160      named after author's initial and "topic" is a descriptive name
  161      of the topic (in other words, "what's the series is about").
  163    - An unobvious fix meant for 'maint' is applied to a new
  164      topic branch that is forked from the tip of 'maint'.  The
  165      topic is named as ai/maint-topic.
  167    - Changes that pertain to an existing topic are applied to
  168      the branch, but:
  170      - obviously correct ones are applied first;
  172      - questionable ones are discarded or applied to near the tip;
  174    - Replacement patches to an existing topic are accepted only
  175      for commits not in 'next'.
  177    The above except the "replacement" are all done with:
  179      $ git checkout ai/topic ;# or "git checkout -b ai/topic master"
  180      $ git am -sc3 mailbox
  182    while patch replacement is often done by:
  184      $ git format-patch ai/topic~$n..ai/topic ;# export existing
  186    then replace some parts with the new patch, and reapplying:
  188      $ git checkout ai/topic
  189      $ git reset --hard ai/topic~$n
  190      $ git am -sc3 -s 000*.txt
  192    The full test suite is always run for 'maint' and 'master'
  193    after patch application; for topic branches the tests are run
  194    as time permits.
  196  - Merge maint to master as needed:
  198      $ git checkout master
  199      $ git merge maint
  200      $ make test
  202  - Merge master to next as needed:
  204      $ git checkout next
  205      $ git merge master
  206      $ make test
  208  - Review the last issue of "What's cooking" again and see if topics
  209    that are ready to be merged to 'next' are still in good shape
  210    (e.g. has there any new issue identified on the list with the
  211    series?)
  213  - Prepare 'jch' branch, which is used to represent somewhere
  214    between 'master' and 'pu' and often is slightly ahead of 'next'.
  216      $ Meta/Reintegrate master..pu >Meta/redo-jch.sh
  218    The result is a script that lists topics to be merged in order to
  219    rebuild 'pu' as the input to Meta/Reintegrate script.  Remove
  220    later topics that should not be in 'jch' yet.  Add a line that
  221    consists of '### match next' before the name of the first topic
  222    in the output that should be in 'jch' but not in 'next' yet.
  224  - Now we are ready to start merging topics to 'next'.  For each
  225    branch whose tip is not merged to 'next', one of three things can
  226    happen:
  228    - The commits are all next-worthy; merge the topic to next;
  229    - The new parts are of mixed quality, but earlier ones are
  230      next-worthy; merge the early parts to next;
  231    - Nothing is next-worthy; do not do anything.
  233    This step is aided with Meta/redo-jch.sh script created earlier.
  234    If a topic that was already in 'next' gained a patch, the script
  235    would list it as "ai/topic~1".  To include the new patch to the
  236    updated 'next', drop the "~1" part; to keep it excluded, do not
  237    touch the line.  If a topic that was not in 'next' should be
  238    merged to 'next', add it at the end of the list.  Then:
  240      $ git checkout -B jch master
  241      $ Meta/redo-jch.sh -c1
  243    to rebuild the 'jch' branch from scratch.  "-c1" tells the script
  244    to stop merging at the first line that begins with '###'
  245    (i.e. the "### match next" line you added earlier).
  247    At this point, build-test the result.  It may reveal semantic
  248    conflicts (e.g. a topic renamed a variable, another added a new
  249    reference to the variable under its old name), in which case
  250    prepare an appropriate merge-fix first (see appendix), and
  251    rebuild the 'jch' branch from scratch, starting at the tip of
  252    'master'.
  254    Then do the same to 'next'
  256      $ git checkout next
  257      $ sh Meta/redo-jch.sh -c1 -e
  259    The "-e" option allows the merge message that comes from the
  260    history of the topic and the comments in the "What's cooking" to
  261    be edited.  The resulting tree should match 'jch' as the same set
  262    of topics are merged on 'master'; otherwise there is a mismerge.
  263    Investigate why and do not proceed until the mismerge is found
  264    and rectified.
  266      $ git diff jch next
  268    When all is well, clean up the redo-jch.sh script with
  270      $ sh Meta/redo-jch.sh -u
  272    This removes topics listed in the script that have already been
  273    merged to 'master'.  This may lose '### match next' marker;
  274    add it again to the appropriate place when it happens.
  276  - Rebuild 'pu'.
  278      $ Meta/Reintegrate master..pu >Meta/redo-pu.sh
  280    Edit the result by adding new topics that are not still in 'pu'
  281    in the script.  Then
  283      $ git checkout -B pu jch
  284      $ sh Meta/redo-pu.sh
  286    When all is well, clean up the redo-pu.sh script with
  288      $ sh Meta/redo-pu.sh -u
  290    Double check by running
  292      $ git branch --no-merged pu
  294    to see there is no unexpected leftover topics.
  296    At this point, build-test the result for semantic conflicts, and
  297    if there are, prepare an appropriate merge-fix first (see
  298    appendix), and rebuild the 'pu' branch from scratch, starting at
  299    the tip of 'jch'.
  301  - Update "What's cooking" message to review the updates to
  302    existing topics, newly added topics and graduated topics.
  304    This step is helped with Meta/cook script.
  306      $ Meta/cook
  308    This script inspects the history between master..pu, finds tips
  309    of topic branches, compares what it found with the current
  310    contents in Meta/whats-cooking.txt, and updates that file.
  311    Topics not listed in the file but are found in master..pu are
  312    added to the "New topics" section, topics listed in the file that
  313    are no longer found in master..pu are moved to the "Graduated to
  314    master" section, and topics whose commits changed their states
  315    (e.g. used to be only in 'pu', now merged to 'next') are updated
  316    with change markers "<<" and ">>".
  318    Look for lines enclosed in "<<" and ">>"; they hold contents from
  319    old file that are replaced by this integration round.  After
  320    verifying them, remove the old part.  Review the description for
  321    each topic and update its doneness and plan as needed.  To review
  322    the updated plan, run
  324      $ Meta/cook -w
  326    which will pick up comments given to the topics, such as "Will
  327    merge to 'next'", etc. (see Meta/cook script to learn what kind
  328    of phrases are supported).
  330  - Compile, test and install all four (five) integration branches;
  331    Meta/Dothem script may aid this step.
  333  - Format documentation if the 'master' branch was updated;
  334    Meta/dodoc.sh script may aid this step.
  336  - Push the integration branches out to public places; Meta/pushall
  337    script may aid this step.
  339 Observations
  340 ------------
  342 Some observations to be made.
  344  * Each topic is tested individually, and also together with other
  345    topics cooking first in 'pu', then in 'jch' and then in 'next'.
  346    Until it matures, no part of it is merged to 'master'.
  348  * A topic already in 'next' can get fixes while still in
  349    'next'.  Such a topic will have many merges to 'next' (in
  350    other words, "git log --first-parent next" will show many
  351    "Merge branch 'ai/topic' to next" for the same topic.
  353  * An unobvious fix for 'maint' is cooked in 'next' and then
  354    merged to 'master' to make extra sure it is Ok and then
  355    merged to 'maint'.
  357  * Even when 'next' becomes empty (in other words, all topics
  358    prove stable and are merged to 'master' and "git diff master
  359    next" shows empty), it has tons of merge commits that will
  360    never be in 'master'.
  362  * In principle, "git log --first-parent master..next" should
  363    show nothing but merges (in practice, there are fixup commits
  364    and reverts that are not merges).
  366  * Commits near the tip of a topic branch that are not in 'next'
  367    are fair game to be discarded, replaced or rewritten.
  368    Commits already merged to 'next' will not be.
  370  * Being in the 'next' branch is not a guarantee for a topic to
  371    be included in the next feature release.  Being in the
  372    'master' branch typically is.
  375 Appendix
  376 --------
  378 Preparing a "merge-fix"
  379 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
  381 A merge of two topics may not textually conflict but still have
  382 conflict at the semantic level. A classic example is for one topic
  383 to rename an variable and all its uses, while another topic adds a
  384 new use of the variable under its old name. When these two topics
  385 are merged together, the reference to the variable newly added by
  386 the latter topic will still use the old name in the result.
  388 The Meta/Reintegrate script that is used by redo-jch and redo-pu
  389 scripts implements a crude but usable way to work this issue around.
  390 When the script merges branch $X, it checks if "refs/merge-fix/$X"
  391 exists, and if so, the effect of it is squashed into the result of
  392 the mechanical merge.  In other words,
  394      $ echo $X | Meta/Reintegrate
  396 is roughly equivalent to this sequence:
  398      $ git merge --rerere-autoupdate $X
  399      $ git commit
  400      $ git cherry-pick -n refs/merge-fix/$X
  401      $ git commit --amend
  403 The goal of this "prepare a merge-fix" step is to come up with a
  404 commit that can be squashed into a result of mechanical merge to
  405 correct semantic conflicts.
  407 After finding that the result of merging branch "ai/topic" to an
  408 integration branch had such a semantic conflict, say pu~4, check the
  409 problematic merge out on a detached HEAD, edit the working tree to
  410 fix the semantic conflict, and make a separate commit to record the
  411 fix-up:
  413      $ git checkout pu~4
  414      $ git show -s --pretty=%s ;# double check
  415      Merge branch 'ai/topic' to pu
  416      $ edit
  417      $ git commit -m 'merge-fix/ai/topic' -a
  419 Then make a reference "refs/merge-fix/ai/topic" to point at this
  420 result:
  422      $ git update-ref refs/merge-fix/ai/topic HEAD
  424 Then double check the result by asking Meta/Reintegrate to redo the
  425 merge:
  427      $ git checkout pu~5 ;# the parent of the problem merge
  428      $ echo ai/topic | Meta/Reintegrate
  429      $ git diff pu~4
  431 This time, because you prepared refs/merge-fix/ai/topic, the
  432 resulting merge should have been tweaked to include the fix for the
  433 semantic conflict.
  435 Note that this assumes that the order in which conflicting branches
  436 are merged does not change.  If the reason why merging ai/topic
  437 branch needs this merge-fix is because another branch merged earlier
  438 to the integration branch changed the underlying assumption ai/topic
  439 branch made (e.g. ai/topic branch added a site to refer to a
  440 variable, while the other branch renamed that variable and adjusted
  441 existing use sites), and if you changed redo-jch (or redo-pu) script
  442 to merge ai/topic branch before the other branch, then the above
  443 merge-fix should not be applied while merging ai/topic, but should
  444 instead be applied while merging the other branch.  You would need
  445 to move the fix to apply to the other branch, perhaps like this:
  447       $ mf=refs/merge-fix
  448       $ git update-ref $mf/$the_other_branch $mf/ai/topic
  449       $ git update-ref -d $mf/ai/topic