Tom Stellard via llvm-dev
2019-Oct-15 07:14 UTC
[llvm-dev] How soon after the GitHub migration should committing with git-llvm become optional?
Hi, I mentioned this in my email last week, but I wanted to start a new thread to get everyone's input on what to do about the git-llvm script after the GitHub migration. The original plan was to require the use of the git-llvm script when committing to GitHub even after the migration was complete. The reason we decided to do this was so that we could prevent developers from accidentally pushing merge commits and making the history non-linear. Just in the last week, the GitHub team completed the "Require Linear History" branch protection, which means we can now enforce linear history server side and do not need the git-llvm script to do this. With this new development, the question I have is when should the git-llvm script become optional? Should we make it optional immediately, so that developers can push directly using vanilla git from day 1, or should we wait a few weeks/months until things have stabilized to make it optional? Thanks, Tom
Roman Lebedev via llvm-dev
2019-Oct-15 07:20 UTC
[llvm-dev] [cfe-dev] How soon after the GitHub migration should committing with git-llvm become optional?
On Tue, Oct 15, 2019 at 10:14 AM Tom Stellard via cfe-dev <cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:> > Hi, > > I mentioned this in my email last week, but I wanted to start a new > thread to get everyone's input on what to do about the git-llvm script > after the GitHub migration. > > The original plan was to require the use of the git-llvm script when > committing to GitHub even after the migration was complete. > The reason we decided to do this was so that we could prevent developers > from accidentally pushing merge commits and making the history non-linear. > > Just in the last week, the GitHub team completed the "Require Linear > History" branch protection, which means we can now enforce linear > history server side and do not need the git-llvm script to do this.What about prevention of new branch creation?>From the bugzilla disscussion, i gather that is not possible to do via github?> With this new development, the question I have is when should the > git-llvm script become optional? Should we make it optional immediately, > so that developers can push directly using vanilla git from day 1, or should we > wait a few weeks/months until things have stabilized to make it optional? > > Thanks, > TomRoman> _______________________________________________ > cfe-dev mailing list > cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org > https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-dev
Marcus Johnson via llvm-dev
2019-Oct-15 07:47 UTC
[llvm-dev] [cfe-dev] How soon after the GitHub migration should committing with git-llvm become optional?
I say retire it instantly.> On Oct 15, 2019, at 3:14 AM, Tom Stellard via cfe-dev <cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > Hi, > > I mentioned this in my email last week, but I wanted to start a new > thread to get everyone's input on what to do about the git-llvm script > after the GitHub migration. > > The original plan was to require the use of the git-llvm script when > committing to GitHub even after the migration was complete. > The reason we decided to do this was so that we could prevent developers > from accidentally pushing merge commits and making the history non-linear. > > Just in the last week, the GitHub team completed the "Require Linear > History" branch protection, which means we can now enforce linear > history server side and do not need the git-llvm script to do this. > > With this new development, the question I have is when should the > git-llvm script become optional? Should we make it optional immediately, > so that developers can push directly using vanilla git from day 1, or should we > wait a few weeks/months until things have stabilized to make it optional? > > Thanks, > Tom > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > cfe-dev mailing list > cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org > https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-dev
David Zarzycki via llvm-dev
2019-Oct-15 11:13 UTC
[llvm-dev] [cfe-dev] How soon after the GitHub migration should committing with git-llvm become optional?
I’d like to see it go away. For better and for worse, git is feature rich and that makes maintaining a wrapper script difficult. Personally speaking, I had to fix a git-llvm bug recently because it made flimsy assumptions about git remote names and how upstream tracking repositories work.> On Oct 15, 2019, at 10:47 AM, Marcus Johnson via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > I say retire it instantly. > >> On Oct 15, 2019, at 3:14 AM, Tom Stellard via cfe-dev <cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: >> >> Hi, >> >> I mentioned this in my email last week, but I wanted to start a new >> thread to get everyone's input on what to do about the git-llvm script >> after the GitHub migration. >> >> The original plan was to require the use of the git-llvm script when >> committing to GitHub even after the migration was complete. >> The reason we decided to do this was so that we could prevent developers >> from accidentally pushing merge commits and making the history non-linear. >> >> Just in the last week, the GitHub team completed the "Require Linear >> History" branch protection, which means we can now enforce linear >> history server side and do not need the git-llvm script to do this. >> >> With this new development, the question I have is when should the >> git-llvm script become optional? Should we make it optional immediately, >> so that developers can push directly using vanilla git from day 1, or should we >> wait a few weeks/months until things have stabilized to make it optional? >> >> Thanks, >> Tom >> >> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> cfe-dev mailing list >> cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org >> https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-dev > _______________________________________________ > LLVM Developers mailing list > llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org > https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev
Tom Stellard via llvm-dev
2019-Oct-15 18:04 UTC
[llvm-dev] [cfe-dev] How soon after the GitHub migration should committing with git-llvm become optional?
On 10/15/2019 12:20 AM, Roman Lebedev wrote:> On Tue, Oct 15, 2019 at 10:14 AM Tom Stellard via cfe-dev > <cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: >> >> Hi, >> >> I mentioned this in my email last week, but I wanted to start a new >> thread to get everyone's input on what to do about the git-llvm script >> after the GitHub migration. >> >> The original plan was to require the use of the git-llvm script when >> committing to GitHub even after the migration was complete. >> The reason we decided to do this was so that we could prevent developers >> from accidentally pushing merge commits and making the history non-linear. >> >> Just in the last week, the GitHub team completed the "Require Linear >> History" branch protection, which means we can now enforce linear >> history server side and do not need the git-llvm script to do this. > > What about prevention of new branch creation? > From the bugzilla disscussion, i gather that is not possible to do via github? >Correct, but the git-llvm script can only prevent people from creating new branches if they use the script. Someone could still create a new branch using `git push`. We can use branch protections to prevent pushing to existing branches but not for preventing new ones. -Tom>> With this new development, the question I have is when should the >> git-llvm script become optional? Should we make it optional immediately, >> so that developers can push directly using vanilla git from day 1, or should we >> wait a few weeks/months until things have stabilized to make it optional? >> >> Thanks, >> Tom > Roman > >> _______________________________________________ >> cfe-dev mailing list >> cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org >> https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-dev
Lei Huang via llvm-dev
2019-Oct-15 18:51 UTC
[llvm-dev] [cfe-dev] How soon after the GitHub migration should committing with git-llvm become optional?
<div class="socmaildefaultfont" dir="ltr" style="font-family:Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;font-size:10pt" ><div dir="ltr" ><div><font face="Default Monospace,Courier New,Courier,monospace" size="2" >On 10/15/2019 12:20 AM, Roman Lebedev wrote:<br>> On Tue, Oct 15, 2019 at 10:14 AM Tom Stellard via cfe-dev<br>> <cfe-dev@lists.llvm.org> wrote:<br>>><br>>> Hi,<br>>><br>>> I mentioned this in my email last week, but I wanted to start a new<br>>> thread to get everyone's input on what to do about the git-llvm script<br>>> after the GitHub migration.<br>>><br>>> The original plan was to require the use of the git-llvm script when<br>>> committing to GitHub even after the migration was complete.<br>>> The reason we decided to do this was so that we could prevent developers<br>>> from accidentally pushing merge commits and making the history non-linear.<br>>><br>>> Just in the last week, the GitHub team completed the "Require Linear<br>>> History" branch protection, which means we can now enforce linear<br>>> history server side and do not need the git-llvm script to do this.<br>><br>> What about prevention of new branch creation?<br>> From the bugzilla disscussion, i gather that is not possible to do via github?<br>><br><br>Correct, but the git-llvm script can only prevent people from creating new<br>branches if they use the script. Someone could still create a new branch<br>using `git push`. We can use branch protections to prevent pushing to<br>existing branches but not for preventing new ones.<br><br>-Tom<br><br>Maybe I missed something, but the git doc seem to indicate we can setup a server </font></div> <div><font face="Default Monospace,Courier New,Courier,monospace" size="2" >side pre-receive hook. Can we not use this to prevent users from creating a new branch?</font></div> <div> </div> <div><font face="Default Monospace,Courier New,Courier,monospace" size="2" >- Lei<br><br>>> With this new development, the question I have is when should the<br>>> git-llvm script become optional? Should we make it optional immediately,<br>>> so that developers can push directly using vanilla git from day 1, or should we<br>>> wait a few weeks/months until things have stabilized to make it optional?<br>>><br>>> Thanks,<br>>> Tom<br>> Roman<br>><br>>> _______________________________________________<br>>> cfe-dev mailing list<br>>> cfe-dev@lists.llvm.org<br>>> <a href="https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-dev" target="_blank">https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-dev</a> <br><br>_______________________________________________<br>cfe-dev mailing list<br>cfe-dev@lists.llvm.org<br><a href="https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-dev" target="_blank">https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-dev</a> </font><br> </div></div> <div dir="ltr" > </div></div><BR>
Hubert Tong via llvm-dev
2019-Oct-15 19:26 UTC
[llvm-dev] [cfe-dev] How soon after the GitHub migration should committing with git-llvm become optional?
On Tue, Oct 15, 2019 at 3:47 AM Marcus Johnson via llvm-dev < llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:> I say retire it instantly. >+1. It has never been a real requirement to use the script. Using native svn is still viable until the point of the migration.> > > On Oct 15, 2019, at 3:14 AM, Tom Stellard via cfe-dev < > cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > > > Hi, > > > > I mentioned this in my email last week, but I wanted to start a new > > thread to get everyone's input on what to do about the git-llvm script > > after the GitHub migration. > > > > The original plan was to require the use of the git-llvm script when > > committing to GitHub even after the migration was complete. > > The reason we decided to do this was so that we could prevent developers > > from accidentally pushing merge commits and making the history > non-linear. > > > > Just in the last week, the GitHub team completed the "Require Linear > > History" branch protection, which means we can now enforce linear > > history server side and do not need the git-llvm script to do this. > > > > With this new development, the question I have is when should the > > git-llvm script become optional? Should we make it optional immediately, > > so that developers can push directly using vanilla git from day 1, or > should we > > wait a few weeks/months until things have stabilized to make it optional? > > > > Thanks, > > Tom > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > cfe-dev mailing list > > cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org > > https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-dev > _______________________________________________ > LLVM Developers mailing list > llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org > https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev >-------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20191015/747fc2a9/attachment.html>