[Pywps-dev] development workflow update

[Tom Kralidis]

Done.  Notes:

- master is now updated.  Development for PyWPS 4 is in geopython/pywps master
- 3.2 branch support happens in pywps-3.2
- just in case, I made a copy of master before the merge (branch
called master-old-2014-02-14
- devs should update their repos/forks accordingly before moving any further

..Tom



On Sun, Feb 14, 2016 at 3:01 AM, Jachym Cepicky
<jachym.cepicky at gmail.com> wrote:
> HI Tom,
>
> thanks for summarising the topic
>
> I was always saying: we should put stable release to master.
>
> But I think,  .. pywps-4 is now in "good enough" shape, so it can be put to
> master branch.
>
> Anybody who uses "master" should be on the mailing list, so no big surprise
> should occur, when the big bang happens.
>
> so from my perspective: any time now :)
>
> J
>
> čt 11. 2. 2016 v 21:29 odesílatel Tom Kralidis <tomkralidis at gmail.com>
> napsal:
>>
>>
>> Thanks Luís.  FYI I've tested this approach against my fork for an idea:
>>
>> https://github.com/tomkralidis/pywps
>>
>> Here is the commit history:
>>
>> https://github.com/tomkralidis/pywps/commits/master
>>
>> Note that last push is the action that updates master.
>>
>> As well, I would push a backup copy of master called master-old before
>> merging just in case.
>>
>> Thoughts on moving forward?  To recap, propose pywps-4 branch to become
>> the new master branch and branch pywps-3.2 is our 3.x support.
>>
>> ..Tom
>>
>> On Thu, 11 Feb 2016, Luís de Sousa wrote:
>>
>> > Date: Thu, 11 Feb 2016 19:51:49 +0100
>> > From: Luís de Sousa <luis.a.de.sousa at gmail.com>
>> > To: Tom Kralidis <tomkralidis at gmail.com>
>> > Cc: "pywps-dev at lists.osgeo.org" <pywps-dev at lists.osgeo.org>
>> > Subject: Re: [Pywps-dev] development workflow update
>> >
>> > Hi Tom,
>> >
>> > I understand your points; the ours strategy looks appropriate.
>> >
>> > Luís
>> >
>> > On 11 February 2016 at 13:30, Tom Kralidis <tomkralidis at gmail.com>
>> > wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Hi Luís: good question.  IMHO keeping both under the same repostory
>> >> makes sense from a project viability perspective:
>> >>
>> >> - we are in OSGeo incubation for 3. Doing a merge now keeps the
>> >>   project straight / clean over time
>> >> - since the incubation started in 3, it is not clear if the
>> >>   application will be valid after rewriting the software, dump the old
>> >>   code base and starting from scratch.  Having said this, 4 will have
>> >> to
>> >>   to be mature, which takes time, with lots of deployments and
>> >> community
>> >>   behind it
>> >> - there is already a considerable community around 3 so let's leverage
>> >>   that existing community
>> >> - the licensing change and rewrite between PyWPS 3 and 4 does not
>> >> present
>> >>   any complications
>> >> - packaging management becomes much easier along a single path
>> >>
>> >> ..Tom
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> On Thu, 11 Feb 2016, Luís de Sousa wrote:
>> >>
>> >>> Date: Thu, 11 Feb 2016 08:44:25 +0100
>> >>> From: Luís de Sousa <luis.a.de.sousa at gmail.com>
>> >>> To: Tom Kralidis <tomkralidis at gmail.com>
>> >>> Cc: "pywps-dev at lists.osgeo.org" <pywps-dev at lists.osgeo.org>
>> >>> Subject: Re: [Pywps-dev] development workflow update
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> Hi there Tom,
>> >>>
>> >>> What are the advantages of merging the two git projects? It seems far
>> >>> simpler to keep versions 3 and 4 separated.
>> >>>
>> >>> Luís
>> >>>
>> >>> On 11 February 2016 at 02:37, Tom Kralidis <tomkralidis at gmail.com>
>> >>> wrote:
>> >>>>
>> >>>> More thoughts:
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Given current master and pywps-4 branches have totally different
>> >>>> commit histories, it is not possible to simply merge pywps-4 into
>> >>>> master via GitHub pull request.  One option we could consider is
>> >>>> using
>> >>>> the "ours" merge strategy:
>> >>>>
>> >>>> git checkout pywps-4
>> >>>> git merge -s ours master
>> >>>> git checkout master
>> >>>> git merge pywps-4
>> >>>> git push -f origin master
>> >>>>
>> >>>> This essentially pushes pywps-4 into master branch without wiping out
>> >>>> master branch history.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> ..Tom
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>> On Tue, Feb 9, 2016 at 4:28 PM, Tom Kralidis <tomkralidis at gmail.com>
>> >>>> wrote:
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> Hi all: FYI the following have been completed
>> >>>>> against https://github.com/geopython/pywps:
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> - master branch is up to date
>> >>>>> - issues / milestones are up to date and represent 3.x and 4.x plans
>> >>>>> - branch pywps-4 represents our PyWPS 4 effort
>> >>>>> - branch pywps-3.2 represents our 3.x development.  At this point in
>> >>>>> time
>> >>>>> any
>> >>>>>   fixes in master that apply to 3.x should be also applied to branch
>> >>>>> pywps-3.2
>> >>>>> - any further 3.x releases are to built/tagged/released off branch
>> >>>>> pywps-3.2
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> At some point branch pywps-4 will be merged as master and pywps-3.2
>> >>>>> will
>> >>>>> be
>> >>>>> our 3.x support branch.  From that point forward, any changes in
>> >>>>> master
>> >>>>> should _not_ be applied to branch pywps-3.2 given the backward
>> >>>>> compability break.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> I'd like to hear thoughts on pywps-4 -> master efforts and when
>> >>>>> folks
>> >>>>> think is a good time to move that over.  The idea here is that we
>> >>>>> have
>> >>>>> supported releases (3.2.3) to download or pip install, and master
>> >>>>> represents development.  Does anyone have any knowledge that master
>> >>>>> is being used operationally anywhere (which is a bad idea given it's
>> >>>>> not a release).
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> Cheers
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> ..Tom
>> >>>>
>> >>>> _______________________________________________
>> >>>> pywps-dev mailing list
>> >>>> pywps-dev at lists.osgeo.org
>> >>>> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/pywps-dev
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>
>> >
>> _______________________________________________
>> pywps-dev mailing list
>> pywps-dev at lists.osgeo.org
>> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/pywps-dev