Skip to main content

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [List Home]
Re: [wtp-dev] Branching Strategy plus other topics, especially JUnit tests


Let's make an official branching policy. We've been too loose in the past and it was confusing.

Lawrence mentioned the one official branching requirement, that 1.5 maintenance would be in a branch called
R1_5_maintenance (I think he left off the 'R' though :)

This is done for all the map files (releng project)
And ... each component branches only if/when they need to (otherwise continue 2.0 development in HEAD).

And, I'd prefer that the final versions that are in the 1.5 release to have a tag (not branch) of R1_5
as this makes some cvs operations easier (like comparing many projects at one).
I'm not sure if this will be easy for you to do if you start 2.0 early .. and deliberatley start a
special 1.5 only branch ... but suspect there is a way. (but, if possible, I'd skip that its bound to
be confusing 4 months from now, since 1.5.1 should branch from 1.5, etc.
You an always start your own special KostaBranch to keep work in (and even build, etc)
if you are just talking about some short period of extra time.

Speaking of which ... thanks for letting us know you might have some extra time to help with some
1.5 tasks ... I'm sure if anyone can think of anything, they'll let you know.

Me first. How about some more JUnit coverage in those that do not have any coverage? See

Seems an easy task to add tests just to make sure plugins are present and the bundle can be started.
(And, I just happen to know that the RDB team would appreciate some help with some of the basic getting started test plugins :)

Or, perhaps a performance benchmark to see how many other plugins are activated when one plugin is purposely activated?
Or .. perhaps some full Callisto performance or UI testing? With everything installed?
Or .. if you're really "hooked" on only working on only facets .. looks like there is not 100% coverage there yet?
Maybe you could be the first to reach 100%? And test to make sure Jeffrey's tool is working right? :)

org.eclipse.jst.common.project.facet.core 4 36 7 64

org.eclipse.wst.common.project.facet.core 470 87 70 13
org.eclipse.wst.common.project.facet.ui 0 0 210 100

As a reminder to us all ... I think the PMC would be very open to approving "bugs" that just added JUnit "coverage tests" .. these are not the API JUnit tests we've focused on in the past ...
but Jeffrey has started using TPTP to measure the test coverage of our implementation ... another important indicator of project health and platform readiness.

So .. lot's to do!


"Konstantin Komissarchik" <kosta@xxxxxxx>
Sent by: wtp-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx

06/06/2006 01:11 PM

Please respond to
"General discussion of project-wide or architectural issues." <wtp-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>

"General discussion of project-wide or architectural issues." <wtp-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
[wtp-dev] Branching Strategy

Does WTP have an official branching strategy? Does it matter if all plugins branch in the same way as long as the right versions end up in the map files? I’d like to start working right now on 1.5.1 and 2.0 tasks, but I do not want to hold the changes local until 1.5 ships. I am thinking about using the following branch plan for the faceted project framework plugins. Note that that 1.5 version of the facet plugins would ship from a branch under this plan.
            2.0 (main)
  (now) ---------------------------------------------------| (2.0 ships)
        |   1.5
        |----------| (1.5 ships)
          |   1.5.1
          |---------------------| (1.5.1 ships)
On a related note, has a criteria been defined for the 1.5.1 release? What type of changes will be admitted? Will there be an approval process?
- Konstantin

Notice:  This email message, together with any attachments, may contain
information  of  BEA Systems,  Inc.,  its subsidiaries  and  affiliated
entities,  that may be confidential,  proprietary,  copyrighted  and/or
legally privileged, and is intended solely for the use of the individual
or entity named in this message. If you are not the intended recipient,
and have received this message in error, please immediately return this
by email and then delete it.
wtp-dev mailing list

Back to the top