git workflow

[vesparny]

We need to define a git workflow, and think about creating a wiki entry or at least a CONTRIBUTING.md

This is important for give guidelines to the community on how to contribute to Poseidon.

Here a couple of interesting link:

• https://www.atlassian.com/git/workflows
• https://wiki.diasporafoundation.org/Git_Workflow
• http://symfony.com/doc/current/contributing/code/patches.html

@scottwolpow @spacemonkey do you have any previous experience?

[scottwolpow]

We use what may be called the forking workflow. Each dev has a repo, which pushes via Jenkins to site repo. We use a Dir called DataDump with a update_query.sql to do the deltas. We are also working on making these files cumulative. Then I can approve each developers wok as standalone. Finally I then merge each dev and test again, finally pushing to the perfect repo of approved code.

[spacemonkey]

I think we should go with gitflow, it's mature, common and pretty sound. We're rolling with node and mongo here Scott, no SQL :-P

[robconery]

Gitflow works really well but I think it might be for teams that are relying on Git directly, rather than going through Github. I've used Github completely and it works really well:

• We use the issue list to define features against a fork or branch. This can be in our own repo (which is a good idea) or the trunk.
• We flex the issue list using assignments and labels so we all know what's going on and who's implementing what
• Once implemented, we close it off and now we have an issue tied to development so our tracking (through Github) is tied directly to features/who/when/why.
• We can leverage the comments for each issue/pr so we can have code reviews that are tightly focused on a given feature and branch
• We can then use whatever flow works for us individually and the project has a nice, tight timeline that we can rebase as needed.

Thoughts on this?

[scottwolpow]

@Mitch I know we are using mongo, just stating what I have been using. Github is also fine and supports gitflow