Contributors mailing list archives

Re: Migration to version 9

Savoir-faire Linux, Maxime Chambreuil
- 16/09/2015 00:12:05
Assuming we move forward with option 2:

Is someone interested to script the pre-migration tasks for every OCA repo ?

Maxime Chambreuil
+1 (514) 276-5468 #126

----- Le 7 Sep 15, à 5:53, <> a écrit :

I'm still in favor of option 2, mainly because it is the only one that allows an efficient and systematic forward porting of fixes. In all projects, it is an expectation of users that fixes done in a supported version are forward-ported systematically to other supported versions. We may not have the organization nor ressources to do it systematically today but it is a goal we'll have to reach at some point. To the best of my knowledge, git merge is the best, easiest, less surprising way to to this, and we must therefore select a solution that preserves this possibility. As I understand options 1 and 3 both break the git merge workflow by creating conflicts in unported modules. 
I've read two main arguments against having unported modules at repo root:
* "it clutters the repository": I argue instead that with a proper presentation such as [1] it is not confusing at all and it has even the benefit of giving visibility to unported modules (which is important too so people easily now what exists and can simply be ported)
* "installable=False must be handled in many tools": I think this is not hard at all, and since the flag is there, it's semantics has to be honored by all tools anyway.

Best regards,


On Mon, Sep 7, 2015 at 9:37 AM, Daniel Reis <> wrote:
> Still, with 2. most of the history will be the same than 8.0 and then
> only a few commits will need to be forwarded from 8.0 to 9.0 when
> migrating a module which has 3 effects:
This is also true for option 3 (delete unported modules from the repo), 
and it doesn't have the disadvantage of the unported modules cluttering 
the repo root.


Post to:

Post to: