# Merging release branches back to parent - Thread: https://externals.io/message/73514 - Original archive: https://news-web.php.net/php.internals/73514 - Started by johannes@schlueters.de on 2014-04-02T12:23:59+00:00 - Messages: 4 - Reply by email to internals@lists.php.net - More for agents: search with https://externals.io/search.md?q={query} · JSON API at https://externals.io/api · documentation at https://externals.io/llms.txt --- ## #73514 — johannes@schlueters.de — 2014-04-02T12:23:59+00:00 URL: https://externals.io/message/73514#73514 Hi RMs, we currently use release branches which we don't merge back into the original branch.I would like to propose to change this and merge the release branch back into it's parent branch. To the est of my remembrance not doing this is a reminder of SVN merge tracking annoyance which is not relevant anymore. The reason for this change is that it makes it hard to find out whether a patch was part of a release or not and which release it appeared in first. The suggested work flow (pushes ignored) is like this: 1. git checkout PHP-X.Y 2. git branch PHP-X.Y.Z 3. vim NEWS configure.in main/php_version.h && git commit (set to next version X.Y.Z+1) 4. git checkout PHP-X.Y.Z 5. test, cherry pick and release RCs as needed 6. vim NEWS configure.in main/php_version.h && git commit (for release) 7. git tag -s php-X.Y.Z 8. git checkout PHP X.Y 9. git merge PHP-X.Y.Z 10. resolve merge conflict in NEWS and other files && git commit The only change to the current procedure should be that instead of 9 and 10 one currently manually merges NEWS files. johannes --- ## #73515 — johannes@schlueters.de — 2014-04-02T12:35:33+00:00 URL: https://externals.io/message/73514#73515 · In reply to: #73514 > Hi RMs, > > we currently use release branches which we don't merge back into the > original branch.I would like to propose to change this and merge the > release branch back into it's parent branch. To the est of my > remembrance not doing this is a reminder of SVN merge tracking annoyance > which is not relevant anymore. > > The reason for this change is that it makes it hard to find out whether > a patch was part of a release or not and which release it appeared in > first. > > The suggested work flow (pushes ignored) is like this: > > 1. git checkout PHP-X.Y > 2. git branch PHP-X.Y.Z > 3. vim NEWS configure.in main/php_version.h && git commit (set to > next version X.Y.Z+1) > 4. git checkout PHP-X.Y.Z > 5. test, cherry pick and release RCs as needed > 6. vim NEWS configure.in main/php_version.h && git commit (for > release) > 7. git tag -s php-X.Y.Z > 8. git checkout PHP X.Y > 9. git merge PHP-X.Y.Z > 10. resolve merge conflict in NEWS and other files && git commit This was missing a step already done with current procedure: 11. Merge up till reaching master as we do for all other commits, obviously. johannes --- ## #73572 — Julien Pauli — 2014-04-03T14:29:11+00:00 URL: https://externals.io/message/73514#73572 · In reply to: #73515 On Wed, Apr 2, 2014 at 2:35 PM, Johannes Schlüter wrote: > > > […] > > This was missing a step already done with current procedure: > > 11. Merge up till reaching master > > as we do for all other commits, obviously. > > johannes > > Hello, I'm not against this, but I don't feel the point. Branching back to the original branch will just create one more commit, adding some merging conflicts (NEWS). What if we have cherry piked commits about CVE, will they conflict as well ? I'm not feeling very well yet with git, so that's why I ask. Julien --- ## #73614 — Stas Malyshev — 2014-04-06T20:49:44+00:00 URL: https://externals.io/message/73514#73614 · In reply to: #73572 Hi! > I'm not against this, but I don't feel the point. Same here, I have no problem doing it, just not sure what that would give us. I.e. I'm not sure I'm getting the part about how it makes easier to find out if the patch is part of the release or not. Johannes, could you explain a bit more on that? Thanks, Stas