Thread: create a git symbolic-ref for REL9_3_STABLE
I suppose we'll be branching off 9.3 in a few weeks. That event always creates a service gap in the build farm and similar services, and a race in the NLS service to get everything adjusted to the new branch. It seems to me we could already now create a git symbolic-ref named REL9_3_STABLE that points to master, get all those services updated for the new name, and when the actual branching is supposed to happen, we just remove the symbolic-ref and make a real branch, and everything else should already be in place. I have never actually used symbolic-ref, but after playing with it a little bit, it seems it should work fine for this purpose. Comments?
On 06/03/2013 09:30 PM, Peter Eisentraut wrote: > I suppose we'll be branching off 9.3 in a few weeks. That event always > creates a service gap in the build farm and similar services, and a race > in the NLS service to get everything adjusted to the new branch. The buildfarm has had a mechanism for handling this for a little while now. See <http://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/PostgreSQL_Buildfarm_Howto#Using_run_branches.pl> cheers andrew
On 6/3/13 9:43 PM, Andrew Dunstan wrote: > > On 06/03/2013 09:30 PM, Peter Eisentraut wrote: >> I suppose we'll be branching off 9.3 in a few weeks. That event always >> creates a service gap in the build farm and similar services, and a race >> in the NLS service to get everything adjusted to the new branch. > > > The buildfarm has had a mechanism for handling this for a little while > now. See > <http://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/PostgreSQL_Buildfarm_Howto#Using_run_branches.pl> That helps if you run all the branches anyway. But I think my request is still useful for other places.
----- Original Message ----- > From: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net> > I have never actually used symbolic-ref, but after playing with it a > little bit, it seems it should work fine for this purpose. > > Comments? +1 its should work fine, because any how we just going to add symbolic-ref which contain "ref: refs/heads/master". Just want to ask, what exactly you want, is like this 1. you want to create symbolic -ref as _git symbolic-ref "refs/heads/REL9_3_STABLE" "refs/heads/master"_ 2. which will show in _git branch_ as REL9_3_STABLE -> master * master 3. Then you want to checkout to REL9_3_STABLE , and pull the all changes pointing to master? 4. while actual happened then want to create branch REL9_3_STABLE? Is this way? Regards Amul Sul
On Wed, 2013-06-05 at 08:43 +0800, amul sul wrote: > Just want to ask, what exactly you want, is like this > 1. you want to create symbolic -ref as _git symbolic-ref > "refs/heads/REL9_3_STABLE" "refs/heads/master"_ > 2. which will show in _git branch_ as > REL9_3_STABLE -> master > * master > 3. Then you want to checkout to REL9_3_STABLE , and pull the all > changes pointing to master? > 4. while actual happened then want to create branch REL9_3_STABLE? > > Is this way? yes
On Mon, Jun 3, 2013 at 9:30 PM, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net> wrote: > I suppose we'll be branching off 9.3 in a few weeks. That event always > creates a service gap in the build farm and similar services, and a race > in the NLS service to get everything adjusted to the new branch. > > It seems to me we could already now create a git symbolic-ref named > REL9_3_STABLE that points to master, get all those services updated for > the new name, and when the actual branching is supposed to happen, we > just remove the symbolic-ref and make a real branch, and everything else > should already be in place. > > I have never actually used symbolic-ref, but after playing with it a > little bit, it seems it should work fine for this purpose. > > Comments? I think we should just go ahead and really create the branch. The CF is supposed to start in a week. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
* Robert Haas (robertmhaas@gmail.com) wrote:
> I think we should just go ahead and really create the branch. The CF
> is supposed to start in a week.
+1
Thanks,
Stephen