-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 321
TipCherryPickBody
These instructions use outdated workflow based on svnmerge tool.
Cherry-picking is the act of applying only selected changesets to a current branch, rather than taking all possible changesets to bring the branch up-to-date.
In our case, trunk is the authoritative source for everything that goes in a release; only under exceptional circumstances are changes made to checkpoint or trunk. The general rule is that a change is made to trunk and brought over to checkpoint.
This flow assumes that the needed changesets are already in trunk; if not, you will need to commit a suitable changeset to trunk following your usual development practices prior to using this flow.
Table of Contents
[TOC]
!inline pages="../InitHG" quick="yes" raw="yes"
$ VERSION=3.2.0.beta.yyyymmdd
!inline pages="../CheckOutCheckpoint" quick="yes" raw="yes"
You can review the changes available on trunk to be integrated into checkpoint:
$ svnmerge.py avail --log -S $SVN/trunk
You can look at the diff that was applied by this revision:
$ svnmerge.py avail --diff -S $SVN/trunk -r54321
Use this information to determine the revision(s) to be applied.
After selecting the revision(s), merge them into the checkpoint branch.
From within the checkpoint directory:
$ svnmerge.py merge -r54321,54123,53412 -b -S $SVN/trunk -f commit.txt
!inline pages="../Resolved" quick="yes" raw="yes"
Verify that release_tuple in ReleaseConfig has the correct release and says 'beta' or 'candidate' as appropriate, then run the update-release-info command:
!inline pages="../UpdateFiles" quick="yes" raw="yes"
Prepare a log.file that describes the revisions you pulled over. You can use the commit.txt returned by the merge step to help prepare the log file. Don't just reuse commit.txt as it tends to be very verbose and hard to read.
Here's an example of a reasonable log.file:
Cherry-picked revisions from trunk because blah blah blah.
From John Doe:
- One item that was done by John Doe.
- Another item that was done by John Doe.
From Jim Smith:
- Item done by Jim Smith.
Use your judgment. If all the revision(s) from John Doe were documentation, and Jim Smith fixed an important bug (and was the actual reason for the cherry-picking), the log message might be like this:
Jim Smith fixed the yadda yadda by blah blah, and the issue was
deemed important enough to be brought over into the checkpoint
branch on a expedited schedule toward a micro release.
Also picked up documentation updates from John Doe as they have
no possibility of destabilizing the release.
Then commit the result to SVN:
!inline pages="../Commit" quick="yes" raw="yes"
!inline pages="../BuildAndTest" quick="yes" raw="yes"
The sequel describes all the steps for a full-fledged beta or candidate release. This could be overkill. For example, if the change is small and has no impact on the way SCons operates (such as a fix to a regression test so that a production release may proceed), there's no reason to publish the checkpoint at all, as publishing the final release will be sufficient.
There's usually a reason for the choice of changesets to be cherry-picked, and it's important to someone. At a minimum, those interested parties should be notified. Other forms of publishing are optional, so use your judgment as to which, if any, of the following steps should be done.
!inline pages="../Prepare" quick="yes" raw="yes"
If the BuildBot display and the test run(s) are OK, then proceed below to publishing the release. If not, fix the problem in trunk following your usual development practices and go back and start again.
!inline pages="../TagRelease" quick="yes" raw="yes"
!inline pages="../ArchivePackages" quick="yes" raw="yes"
!inline pages="../UpdateSourceForge" quick="yes" raw="yes"
!inline pages="../UpdateSconsOrg" quick="yes" raw="yes"