* [RFC] Create supported branch from edk2-stable* tag (Required to address critical bug BZ3111)
@ 2020-12-15 16:53 Michael D Kinney
2020-12-15 17:16 ` Leif Lindholm
0 siblings, 1 reply; 7+ messages in thread
From: Michael D Kinney @ 2020-12-15 16:53 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: devel@edk2.groups.io, rfc@edk2.groups.io,
gaoliming@byosoft.com.cn, Kinney, Michael D,
Andrew Fish (afish@apple.com), Leif Lindholm,
Laszlo Ersek <lersek@redhat.com> (lersek@redhat.com),
'Sean Brogan', 'Bret Barkelew'
Hello,
The following bug has been fixed on edk2/master
https://bugzilla.tianocore.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3111
https://github.com/tianocore/edk2/pull/1226
This bug is also considered a critical bug against edk2-stable202011. The behavior
of the Variable Lock Protocol was changed in a non-backwards compatible manner in
edk2-stable202011 and this is impacting some downstream platforms. The following
2 commits on edk2/master restore the original behavior of the Variable Lock Protocol.
https://github.com/tianocore/edk2/pull/1226/commits/893cfe2847b83da74f53858d6acaa15a348bad7c
https://github.com/tianocore/edk2/pull/1226/commits/16491ba6a6e9a91cedeeed45bc0fbdfde49f7968
The request here is to create a supported branch from edk2-stable202011 tag and apply
these 2 commits as critical bug fixes on the supported branch.
Since we started using the edk2-stable* tag process, there has not been a request to create
a supported branch from one of those tags. As a result, there are a couple opens that
need to be addressed:
1) Supported branch naming convention.
Proposal: stable/edk2-stable*
Example: stable/edk2-stable202011
2) CI requirements for supported branches.
Proposal: Update .azurepipelines yml files to also trigger on stable/* branches
and update GitHub settings so stable/* branches are protected branches.
3) Release requirements for supported branches.
Proposal: If there are a significant number of critical fixes applied to
a stable/edk2-stable* branch, then a request for a release can be made that
would trigger focused testing of the supported branch and creation of a new
release. If all testing passes, then a tag is created on the stable/edk2-stable*
branch and a release is created on GitHub that summarizes the set of critical
fixes and the testing performed.
Proposal: edk2-stable<YYYY><MM>.<XX>
Example : edk2-stable201111.01
Please let me know if you have any feedback or comments on this proposal. The goal
is to close on this topic this week.
Thank you,
Mike
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: [RFC] Create supported branch from edk2-stable* tag (Required to address critical bug BZ3111)
2020-12-15 16:53 [RFC] Create supported branch from edk2-stable* tag (Required to address critical bug BZ3111) Michael D Kinney
@ 2020-12-15 17:16 ` Leif Lindholm
2020-12-15 18:56 ` [edk2-rfc] " Michael D Kinney
0 siblings, 1 reply; 7+ messages in thread
From: Leif Lindholm @ 2020-12-15 17:16 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Kinney, Michael D
Cc: devel@edk2.groups.io, rfc@edk2.groups.io,
gaoliming@byosoft.com.cn, Andrew Fish (afish@apple.com),
Laszlo Ersek <lersek@redhat.com> (lersek@redhat.com),
'Sean Brogan', 'Bret Barkelew'
Hi Mike,
This looks fine to me.
I will add a potential tweak that I won't strongly advocate for, but
think should be considered:
We don't technically need a branch for this; a tag could be pushed
directly.
On Tue, Dec 15, 2020 at 16:53:09 +0000, Kinney, Michael D wrote:
> Hello,
>
> The following bug has been fixed on edk2/master
>
> https://bugzilla.tianocore.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3111
> https://github.com/tianocore/edk2/pull/1226
>
> This bug is also considered a critical bug against edk2-stable202011. The behavior
> of the Variable Lock Protocol was changed in a non-backwards compatible manner in
> edk2-stable202011 and this is impacting some downstream platforms. The following
> 2 commits on edk2/master restore the original behavior of the Variable Lock Protocol.
>
> https://github.com/tianocore/edk2/pull/1226/commits/893cfe2847b83da74f53858d6acaa15a348bad7c
> https://github.com/tianocore/edk2/pull/1226/commits/16491ba6a6e9a91cedeeed45bc0fbdfde49f7968
>
> The request here is to create a supported branch from edk2-stable202011 tag and apply
> these 2 commits as critical bug fixes on the supported branch.
>
> Since we started using the edk2-stable* tag process, there has not been a request to create
> a supported branch from one of those tags. As a result, there are a couple opens that
> need to be addressed:
>
> 1) Supported branch naming convention.
>
> Proposal: stable/edk2-stable*
> Example: stable/edk2-stable202011
For the bikeshedding part, if we're doing the branches, I support
using the stable/ prefix, but I also think this obviates the need to
include the word stable in the portion after /.
Since branches unlike tags don't have global namespace, I also think
there is no need for the edk2 portion of the name.
So an example branch name could be:
stable/202011
> 2) CI requirements for supported branches.
>
> Proposal: Update .azurepipelines yml files to also trigger on stable/* branches
> and update GitHub settings so stable/* branches are protected branches.
This would of course mandate the use of branches.
> 3) Release requirements for supported branches.
>
> Proposal: If there are a significant number of critical fixes applied to
> a stable/edk2-stable* branch, then a request for a release can be made that
> would trigger focused testing of the supported branch and creation of a new
> release. If all testing passes, then a tag is created on the stable/edk2-stable*
> branch and a release is created on GitHub that summarizes the set of critical
> fixes and the testing performed.
>
> Proposal: edk2-stable<YYYY><MM>.<XX>
> Example : edk2-stable201111.01
Sounds good to me.
Best Regards,
Leif
> Please let me know if you have any feedback or comments on this proposal. The goal
> is to close on this topic this week.
>
> Thank you,
>
> Mike
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: [edk2-rfc] [RFC] Create supported branch from edk2-stable* tag (Required to address critical bug BZ3111)
2020-12-15 17:16 ` Leif Lindholm
@ 2020-12-15 18:56 ` Michael D Kinney
2020-12-15 19:06 ` Bret Barkelew
0 siblings, 1 reply; 7+ messages in thread
From: Michael D Kinney @ 2020-12-15 18:56 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: rfc@edk2.groups.io, leif@nuviainc.com, Kinney, Michael D
Cc: devel@edk2.groups.io, gaoliming@byosoft.com.cn,
Andrew Fish (afish@apple.com),
Laszlo Ersek <lersek@redhat.com> (lersek@redhat.com),
'Sean Brogan', 'Bret Barkelew'
Hi Leif,
I think you are suggesting that a local branch could be created from edk2-stable202011 and the
2 commits cherry-picked onto that local branch and then create a tag on that local branch and
only push the new tag to edk2 repo (e.g. edk2-stable202011.01). Correct?
I think with this approach, we would wait for the community to request a new stable dot tag
(e.g. edk2-stable202011.01) with a specific set of commits.
Another advantage of branch vs tag is that platforms that want to always use an edk2-stable*
tag with all the known critical bug fixes can pull the branch to get the latest fixes. Or select
a tag on the branch or a specific sha on the branch based on their platform requirements. If
a platform has to wait for a new stable dot tag then the platform can not test with those critical
fixes directly from the edk2 repo. They would have to create their own downstream.
I think between the CI use case and this downstream platform use case, a branch has more
advantages than a tag.
I am fine with removing the redundant use of 'stable' and 'edk2' in the branch naming proposal.
Proposal: stable/*
Example: stable/202011
Thanks,
Mike
> -----Original Message-----
> From: rfc@edk2.groups.io <rfc@edk2.groups.io> On Behalf Of Leif Lindholm
> Sent: Tuesday, December 15, 2020 9:17 AM
> To: Kinney, Michael D <michael.d.kinney@intel.com>
> Cc: devel@edk2.groups.io; rfc@edk2.groups.io; gaoliming@byosoft.com.cn; Andrew Fish (afish@apple.com) <afish@apple.com>;
> Laszlo Ersek <lersek@redhat.com> (lersek@redhat.com) <lersek@redhat.com>; 'Sean Brogan' <sean.brogan@microsoft.com>; 'Bret
> Barkelew' <Bret.Barkelew@microsoft.com>
> Subject: Re: [edk2-rfc] [RFC] Create supported branch from edk2-stable* tag (Required to address critical bug BZ3111)
>
> Hi Mike,
>
> This looks fine to me.
> I will add a potential tweak that I won't strongly advocate for, but
> think should be considered:
> We don't technically need a branch for this; a tag could be pushed
> directly.
>
> On Tue, Dec 15, 2020 at 16:53:09 +0000, Kinney, Michael D wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > The following bug has been fixed on edk2/master
> >
> > https://bugzilla.tianocore.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3111
> > https://github.com/tianocore/edk2/pull/1226
> >
> > This bug is also considered a critical bug against edk2-stable202011. The behavior
> > of the Variable Lock Protocol was changed in a non-backwards compatible manner in
> > edk2-stable202011 and this is impacting some downstream platforms. The following
> > 2 commits on edk2/master restore the original behavior of the Variable Lock Protocol.
> >
> > https://github.com/tianocore/edk2/pull/1226/commits/893cfe2847b83da74f53858d6acaa15a348bad7c
> > https://github.com/tianocore/edk2/pull/1226/commits/16491ba6a6e9a91cedeeed45bc0fbdfde49f7968
> >
> > The request here is to create a supported branch from edk2-stable202011 tag and apply
> > these 2 commits as critical bug fixes on the supported branch.
> >
> > Since we started using the edk2-stable* tag process, there has not been a request to create
> > a supported branch from one of those tags. As a result, there are a couple opens that
> > need to be addressed:
> >
> > 1) Supported branch naming convention.
> >
> > Proposal: stable/edk2-stable*
> > Example: stable/edk2-stable202011
>
> For the bikeshedding part, if we're doing the branches, I support
> using the stable/ prefix, but I also think this obviates the need to
> include the word stable in the portion after /.
> Since branches unlike tags don't have global namespace, I also think
> there is no need for the edk2 portion of the name.
> So an example branch name could be:
> stable/202011
>
> > 2) CI requirements for supported branches.
> >
> > Proposal: Update .azurepipelines yml files to also trigger on stable/* branches
> > and update GitHub settings so stable/* branches are protected branches.
>
> This would of course mandate the use of branches.
>
> > 3) Release requirements for supported branches.
> >
> > Proposal: If there are a significant number of critical fixes applied to
> > a stable/edk2-stable* branch, then a request for a release can be made that
> > would trigger focused testing of the supported branch and creation of a new
> > release. If all testing passes, then a tag is created on the stable/edk2-stable*
> > branch and a release is created on GitHub that summarizes the set of critical
> > fixes and the testing performed.
> >
> > Proposal: edk2-stable<YYYY><MM>.<XX>
> > Example : edk2-stable201111.01
>
> Sounds good to me.
>
> Best Regards,
>
> Leif
>
> > Please let me know if you have any feedback or comments on this proposal. The goal
> > is to close on this topic this week.
> >
> > Thank you,
> >
> > Mike
>
>
>
>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: [edk2-rfc] [RFC] Create supported branch from edk2-stable* tag (Required to address critical bug BZ3111)
2020-12-15 18:56 ` [edk2-rfc] " Michael D Kinney
@ 2020-12-15 19:06 ` Bret Barkelew
2020-12-15 19:39 ` Leif Lindholm
0 siblings, 1 reply; 7+ messages in thread
From: Bret Barkelew @ 2020-12-15 19:06 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Kinney, Michael D, rfc@edk2.groups.io, leif@nuviainc.com
Cc: devel@edk2.groups.io, gaoliming@byosoft.com.cn,
Andrew Fish (afish@apple.com),
Laszlo Ersek <lersek@redhat.com> (lersek@redhat.com),
Sean Brogan
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 7524 bytes --]
FWIW, we tried both branches and tags in Mu, and have gotten more mileage out of branches. We will still do tags periodically (to establish a point at which all the sub repos were put through a full validation run), but our platform consumers have shown a preference for just living on the stabilized branch.
- Bret
From: Kinney, Michael D<mailto:michael.d.kinney@intel.com>
Sent: Tuesday, December 15, 2020 10:57 AM
To: rfc@edk2.groups.io<mailto:rfc@edk2.groups.io>; leif@nuviainc.com<mailto:leif@nuviainc.com>; Kinney, Michael D<mailto:michael.d.kinney@intel.com>
Cc: devel@edk2.groups.io<mailto:devel@edk2.groups.io>; gaoliming@byosoft.com.cn<mailto:gaoliming@byosoft.com.cn>; Andrew Fish (afish@apple.com)<mailto:afish@apple.com>; Laszlo Ersek <lersek@redhat.com> (lersek@redhat.com)<mailto:lersek@redhat.com>; Sean Brogan<mailto:sean.brogan@microsoft.com>; Bret Barkelew<mailto:Bret.Barkelew@microsoft.com>
Subject: [EXTERNAL] RE: [edk2-rfc] [RFC] Create supported branch from edk2-stable* tag (Required to address critical bug BZ3111)
Hi Leif,
I think you are suggesting that a local branch could be created from edk2-stable202011 and the
2 commits cherry-picked onto that local branch and then create a tag on that local branch and
only push the new tag to edk2 repo (e.g. edk2-stable202011.01). Correct?
I think with this approach, we would wait for the community to request a new stable dot tag
(e.g. edk2-stable202011.01) with a specific set of commits.
Another advantage of branch vs tag is that platforms that want to always use an edk2-stable*
tag with all the known critical bug fixes can pull the branch to get the latest fixes. Or select
a tag on the branch or a specific sha on the branch based on their platform requirements. If
a platform has to wait for a new stable dot tag then the platform can not test with those critical
fixes directly from the edk2 repo. They would have to create their own downstream.
I think between the CI use case and this downstream platform use case, a branch has more
advantages than a tag.
I am fine with removing the redundant use of 'stable' and 'edk2' in the branch naming proposal.
Proposal: stable/*
Example: stable/202011
Thanks,
Mike
> -----Original Message-----
> From: rfc@edk2.groups.io <rfc@edk2.groups.io> On Behalf Of Leif Lindholm
> Sent: Tuesday, December 15, 2020 9:17 AM
> To: Kinney, Michael D <michael.d.kinney@intel.com>
> Cc: devel@edk2.groups.io; rfc@edk2.groups.io; gaoliming@byosoft.com.cn; Andrew Fish (afish@apple.com) <afish@apple.com>;
> Laszlo Ersek <lersek@redhat.com> (lersek@redhat.com) <lersek@redhat.com>; 'Sean Brogan' <sean.brogan@microsoft.com>; 'Bret
> Barkelew' <Bret.Barkelew@microsoft.com>
> Subject: Re: [edk2-rfc] [RFC] Create supported branch from edk2-stable* tag (Required to address critical bug BZ3111)
>
> Hi Mike,
>
> This looks fine to me.
> I will add a potential tweak that I won't strongly advocate for, but
> think should be considered:
> We don't technically need a branch for this; a tag could be pushed
> directly.
>
> On Tue, Dec 15, 2020 at 16:53:09 +0000, Kinney, Michael D wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > The following bug has been fixed on edk2/master
> >
> > https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fbugzilla.tianocore.org%2Fshow_bug.cgi%3Fid%3D3111&data=04%7C01%7CBret.Barkelew%40microsoft.com%7C36133f4be9b24fbec5ca08d8a12b4024%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C637436554422046735%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&sdata=EZCqLKBAXKgq8J40GFynYtqYIyhUpU7MIlT7wT4Cs9w%3D&reserved=0
> > https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2Ftianocore%2Fedk2%2Fpull%2F1226&data=04%7C01%7CBret.Barkelew%40microsoft.com%7C36133f4be9b24fbec5ca08d8a12b4024%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C637436554422056729%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&sdata=pQG7sjlHRxwh5mugH3vNKoZt88b%2BD7W4YHspsdb%2BQZ8%3D&reserved=0
> >
> > This bug is also considered a critical bug against edk2-stable202011. The behavior
> > of the Variable Lock Protocol was changed in a non-backwards compatible manner in
> > edk2-stable202011 and this is impacting some downstream platforms. The following
> > 2 commits on edk2/master restore the original behavior of the Variable Lock Protocol.
> >
> > https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2Ftianocore%2Fedk2%2Fpull%2F1226%2Fcommits%2F893cfe2847b83da74f53858d6acaa15a348bad7c&data=04%7C01%7CBret.Barkelew%40microsoft.com%7C36133f4be9b24fbec5ca08d8a12b4024%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C637436554422056729%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&sdata=RiNVhyT3fmoVRtLP0fJqbuP1Ow26tDM31J1O6%2B01wMs%3D&reserved=0
> > https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2Ftianocore%2Fedk2%2Fpull%2F1226%2Fcommits%2F16491ba6a6e9a91cedeeed45bc0fbdfde49f7968&data=04%7C01%7CBret.Barkelew%40microsoft.com%7C36133f4be9b24fbec5ca08d8a12b4024%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C637436554422056729%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&sdata=DpZO7U2yoqD%2BK%2F6OxIZoI%2FbIDMbtRr7UBMCBl9PxGkQ%3D&reserved=0
> >
> > The request here is to create a supported branch from edk2-stable202011 tag and apply
> > these 2 commits as critical bug fixes on the supported branch.
> >
> > Since we started using the edk2-stable* tag process, there has not been a request to create
> > a supported branch from one of those tags. As a result, there are a couple opens that
> > need to be addressed:
> >
> > 1) Supported branch naming convention.
> >
> > Proposal: stable/edk2-stable*
> > Example: stable/edk2-stable202011
>
> For the bikeshedding part, if we're doing the branches, I support
> using the stable/ prefix, but I also think this obviates the need to
> include the word stable in the portion after /.
> Since branches unlike tags don't have global namespace, I also think
> there is no need for the edk2 portion of the name.
> So an example branch name could be:
> stable/202011
>
> > 2) CI requirements for supported branches.
> >
> > Proposal: Update .azurepipelines yml files to also trigger on stable/* branches
> > and update GitHub settings so stable/* branches are protected branches.
>
> This would of course mandate the use of branches.
>
> > 3) Release requirements for supported branches.
> >
> > Proposal: If there are a significant number of critical fixes applied to
> > a stable/edk2-stable* branch, then a request for a release can be made that
> > would trigger focused testing of the supported branch and creation of a new
> > release. If all testing passes, then a tag is created on the stable/edk2-stable*
> > branch and a release is created on GitHub that summarizes the set of critical
> > fixes and the testing performed.
> >
> > Proposal: edk2-stable<YYYY><MM>.<XX>
> > Example : edk2-stable201111.01
>
> Sounds good to me.
>
> Best Regards,
>
> Leif
>
> > Please let me know if you have any feedback or comments on this proposal. The goal
> > is to close on this topic this week.
> >
> > Thank you,
> >
> > Mike
>
>
>
>
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 12738 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: [edk2-rfc] [RFC] Create supported branch from edk2-stable* tag (Required to address critical bug BZ3111)
2020-12-15 19:06 ` Bret Barkelew
@ 2020-12-15 19:39 ` Leif Lindholm
2020-12-15 20:42 ` Michael D Kinney
2020-12-17 13:33 ` Laszlo Ersek
0 siblings, 2 replies; 7+ messages in thread
From: Leif Lindholm @ 2020-12-15 19:39 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Bret Barkelew
Cc: Kinney, Michael D, rfc@edk2.groups.io, devel@edk2.groups.io,
gaoliming@byosoft.com.cn, Andrew Fish (afish@apple.com),
Laszlo Ersek <lersek@redhat.com> (lersek@redhat.com),
Sean Brogan
Makes sense. Let's go with the branch.
Mike: yes, that was what I was suggesting wrt cherry-picking and pushing.
Best Regards,
Leif
On Tue, Dec 15, 2020 at 19:06:21 +0000, Bret Barkelew wrote:
> FWIW, we tried both branches and tags in Mu, and have gotten more
> mileage out of branches. We will still do tags periodically (to
> establish a point at which all the sub repos were put through a full
> validation run), but our platform consumers have shown a preference
> for just living on the stabilized branch.
>
> - Bret
>
> From: Kinney, Michael D<mailto:michael.d.kinney@intel.com>
> Sent: Tuesday, December 15, 2020 10:57 AM
> To: rfc@edk2.groups.io<mailto:rfc@edk2.groups.io>; leif@nuviainc.com<mailto:leif@nuviainc.com>; Kinney, Michael D<mailto:michael.d.kinney@intel.com>
> Cc: devel@edk2.groups.io<mailto:devel@edk2.groups.io>; gaoliming@byosoft.com.cn<mailto:gaoliming@byosoft.com.cn>; Andrew Fish (afish@apple.com)<mailto:afish@apple.com>; Laszlo Ersek <lersek@redhat.com> (lersek@redhat.com)<mailto:lersek@redhat.com>; Sean Brogan<mailto:sean.brogan@microsoft.com>; Bret Barkelew<mailto:Bret.Barkelew@microsoft.com>
> Subject: [EXTERNAL] RE: [edk2-rfc] [RFC] Create supported branch from edk2-stable* tag (Required to address critical bug BZ3111)
>
> Hi Leif,
>
> I think you are suggesting that a local branch could be created from edk2-stable202011 and the
> 2 commits cherry-picked onto that local branch and then create a tag on that local branch and
> only push the new tag to edk2 repo (e.g. edk2-stable202011.01). Correct?
>
> I think with this approach, we would wait for the community to request a new stable dot tag
> (e.g. edk2-stable202011.01) with a specific set of commits.
>
> Another advantage of branch vs tag is that platforms that want to always use an edk2-stable*
> tag with all the known critical bug fixes can pull the branch to get the latest fixes. Or select
> a tag on the branch or a specific sha on the branch based on their platform requirements. If
> a platform has to wait for a new stable dot tag then the platform can not test with those critical
> fixes directly from the edk2 repo. They would have to create their own downstream.
>
> I think between the CI use case and this downstream platform use case, a branch has more
> advantages than a tag.
>
> I am fine with removing the redundant use of 'stable' and 'edk2' in the branch naming proposal.
>
> Proposal: stable/*
> Example: stable/202011
>
> Thanks,
>
> Mike
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: rfc@edk2.groups.io <rfc@edk2.groups.io> On Behalf Of Leif Lindholm
> > Sent: Tuesday, December 15, 2020 9:17 AM
> > To: Kinney, Michael D <michael.d.kinney@intel.com>
> > Cc: devel@edk2.groups.io; rfc@edk2.groups.io; gaoliming@byosoft.com.cn; Andrew Fish (afish@apple.com) <afish@apple.com>;
> > Laszlo Ersek <lersek@redhat.com> (lersek@redhat.com) <lersek@redhat.com>; 'Sean Brogan' <sean.brogan@microsoft.com>; 'Bret
> > Barkelew' <Bret.Barkelew@microsoft.com>
> > Subject: Re: [edk2-rfc] [RFC] Create supported branch from edk2-stable* tag (Required to address critical bug BZ3111)
> >
> > Hi Mike,
> >
> > This looks fine to me.
> > I will add a potential tweak that I won't strongly advocate for, but
> > think should be considered:
> > We don't technically need a branch for this; a tag could be pushed
> > directly.
> >
> > On Tue, Dec 15, 2020 at 16:53:09 +0000, Kinney, Michael D wrote:
> > > Hello,
> > >
> > > The following bug has been fixed on edk2/master
> > >
> > > https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fbugzilla.tianocore.org%2Fshow_bug.cgi%3Fid%3D3111&data=04%7C01%7CBret.Barkelew%40microsoft.com%7C36133f4be9b24fbec5ca08d8a12b4024%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C637436554422046735%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&sdata=EZCqLKBAXKgq8J40GFynYtqYIyhUpU7MIlT7wT4Cs9w%3D&reserved=0
> > > https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2Ftianocore%2Fedk2%2Fpull%2F1226&data=04%7C01%7CBret.Barkelew%40microsoft.com%7C36133f4be9b24fbec5ca08d8a12b4024%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C637436554422056729%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&sdata=pQG7sjlHRxwh5mugH3vNKoZt88b%2BD7W4YHspsdb%2BQZ8%3D&reserved=0
> > >
> > > This bug is also considered a critical bug against edk2-stable202011. The behavior
> > > of the Variable Lock Protocol was changed in a non-backwards compatible manner in
> > > edk2-stable202011 and this is impacting some downstream platforms. The following
> > > 2 commits on edk2/master restore the original behavior of the Variable Lock Protocol.
> > >
> > > https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2Ftianocore%2Fedk2%2Fpull%2F1226%2Fcommits%2F893cfe2847b83da74f53858d6acaa15a348bad7c&data=04%7C01%7CBret.Barkelew%40microsoft.com%7C36133f4be9b24fbec5ca08d8a12b4024%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C637436554422056729%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&sdata=RiNVhyT3fmoVRtLP0fJqbuP1Ow26tDM31J1O6%2B01wMs%3D&reserved=0
> > > https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2Ftianocore%2Fedk2%2Fpull%2F1226%2Fcommits%2F16491ba6a6e9a91cedeeed45bc0fbdfde49f7968&data=04%7C01%7CBret.Barkelew%40microsoft.com%7C36133f4be9b24fbec5ca08d8a12b4024%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C637436554422056729%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&sdata=DpZO7U2yoqD%2BK%2F6OxIZoI%2FbIDMbtRr7UBMCBl9PxGkQ%3D&reserved=0
> > >
> > > The request here is to create a supported branch from edk2-stable202011 tag and apply
> > > these 2 commits as critical bug fixes on the supported branch.
> > >
> > > Since we started using the edk2-stable* tag process, there has not been a request to create
> > > a supported branch from one of those tags. As a result, there are a couple opens that
> > > need to be addressed:
> > >
> > > 1) Supported branch naming convention.
> > >
> > > Proposal: stable/edk2-stable*
> > > Example: stable/edk2-stable202011
> >
> > For the bikeshedding part, if we're doing the branches, I support
> > using the stable/ prefix, but I also think this obviates the need to
> > include the word stable in the portion after /.
> > Since branches unlike tags don't have global namespace, I also think
> > there is no need for the edk2 portion of the name.
> > So an example branch name could be:
> > stable/202011
> >
> > > 2) CI requirements for supported branches.
> > >
> > > Proposal: Update .azurepipelines yml files to also trigger on stable/* branches
> > > and update GitHub settings so stable/* branches are protected branches.
> >
> > This would of course mandate the use of branches.
> >
> > > 3) Release requirements for supported branches.
> > >
> > > Proposal: If there are a significant number of critical fixes applied to
> > > a stable/edk2-stable* branch, then a request for a release can be made that
> > > would trigger focused testing of the supported branch and creation of a new
> > > release. If all testing passes, then a tag is created on the stable/edk2-stable*
> > > branch and a release is created on GitHub that summarizes the set of critical
> > > fixes and the testing performed.
> > >
> > > Proposal: edk2-stable<YYYY><MM>.<XX>
> > > Example : edk2-stable201111.01
> >
> > Sounds good to me.
> >
> > Best Regards,
> >
> > Leif
> >
> > > Please let me know if you have any feedback or comments on this proposal. The goal
> > > is to close on this topic this week.
> > >
> > > Thank you,
> > >
> > > Mike
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: [edk2-rfc] [RFC] Create supported branch from edk2-stable* tag (Required to address critical bug BZ3111)
2020-12-15 19:39 ` Leif Lindholm
@ 2020-12-15 20:42 ` Michael D Kinney
2020-12-17 13:33 ` Laszlo Ersek
1 sibling, 0 replies; 7+ messages in thread
From: Michael D Kinney @ 2020-12-15 20:42 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: rfc@edk2.groups.io, leif@nuviainc.com, Bret Barkelew,
Kinney, Michael D
Cc: devel@edk2.groups.io, gaoliming@byosoft.com.cn,
Andrew Fish (afish@apple.com),
Laszlo Ersek <lersek@redhat.com> (lersek@redhat.com),
Sean Brogan
Hi Leif,
Thank you for the feedback.
I will send a revised RFC soon.
I will discuss with Liming in the Tianocore bug scrub this evening.
Mike
> -----Original Message-----
> From: rfc@edk2.groups.io <rfc@edk2.groups.io> On Behalf Of Leif Lindholm
> Sent: Tuesday, December 15, 2020 11:40 AM
> To: Bret Barkelew <Bret.Barkelew@microsoft.com>
> Cc: Kinney, Michael D <michael.d.kinney@intel.com>; rfc@edk2.groups.io; devel@edk2.groups.io; gaoliming@byosoft.com.cn;
> Andrew Fish (afish@apple.com) <afish@apple.com>; Laszlo Ersek <lersek@redhat.com> (lersek@redhat.com) <lersek@redhat.com>;
> Sean Brogan <sean.brogan@microsoft.com>
> Subject: Re: [edk2-rfc] [RFC] Create supported branch from edk2-stable* tag (Required to address critical bug BZ3111)
>
> Makes sense. Let's go with the branch.
>
> Mike: yes, that was what I was suggesting wrt cherry-picking and pushing.
>
> Best Regards,
>
> Leif
>
> On Tue, Dec 15, 2020 at 19:06:21 +0000, Bret Barkelew wrote:
> > FWIW, we tried both branches and tags in Mu, and have gotten more
> > mileage out of branches. We will still do tags periodically (to
> > establish a point at which all the sub repos were put through a full
> > validation run), but our platform consumers have shown a preference
> > for just living on the stabilized branch.
> >
> > - Bret
> >
> > From: Kinney, Michael D<mailto:michael.d.kinney@intel.com>
> > Sent: Tuesday, December 15, 2020 10:57 AM
> > To: rfc@edk2.groups.io<mailto:rfc@edk2.groups.io>; leif@nuviainc.com<mailto:leif@nuviainc.com>; Kinney, Michael
> D<mailto:michael.d.kinney@intel.com>
> > Cc: devel@edk2.groups.io<mailto:devel@edk2.groups.io>; gaoliming@byosoft.com.cn<mailto:gaoliming@byosoft.com.cn>; Andrew
> Fish (afish@apple.com)<mailto:afish@apple.com>; Laszlo Ersek <lersek@redhat.com>
> (lersek@redhat.com)<mailto:lersek@redhat.com>; Sean Brogan<mailto:sean.brogan@microsoft.com>; Bret
> Barkelew<mailto:Bret.Barkelew@microsoft.com>
> > Subject: [EXTERNAL] RE: [edk2-rfc] [RFC] Create supported branch from edk2-stable* tag (Required to address critical bug
> BZ3111)
> >
> > Hi Leif,
> >
> > I think you are suggesting that a local branch could be created from edk2-stable202011 and the
> > 2 commits cherry-picked onto that local branch and then create a tag on that local branch and
> > only push the new tag to edk2 repo (e.g. edk2-stable202011.01). Correct?
> >
> > I think with this approach, we would wait for the community to request a new stable dot tag
> > (e.g. edk2-stable202011.01) with a specific set of commits.
> >
> > Another advantage of branch vs tag is that platforms that want to always use an edk2-stable*
> > tag with all the known critical bug fixes can pull the branch to get the latest fixes. Or select
> > a tag on the branch or a specific sha on the branch based on their platform requirements. If
> > a platform has to wait for a new stable dot tag then the platform can not test with those critical
> > fixes directly from the edk2 repo. They would have to create their own downstream.
> >
> > I think between the CI use case and this downstream platform use case, a branch has more
> > advantages than a tag.
> >
> > I am fine with removing the redundant use of 'stable' and 'edk2' in the branch naming proposal.
> >
> > Proposal: stable/*
> > Example: stable/202011
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Mike
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: rfc@edk2.groups.io <rfc@edk2.groups.io> On Behalf Of Leif Lindholm
> > > Sent: Tuesday, December 15, 2020 9:17 AM
> > > To: Kinney, Michael D <michael.d.kinney@intel.com>
> > > Cc: devel@edk2.groups.io; rfc@edk2.groups.io; gaoliming@byosoft.com.cn; Andrew Fish (afish@apple.com)
> <afish@apple.com>;
> > > Laszlo Ersek <lersek@redhat.com> (lersek@redhat.com) <lersek@redhat.com>; 'Sean Brogan' <sean.brogan@microsoft.com>;
> 'Bret
> > > Barkelew' <Bret.Barkelew@microsoft.com>
> > > Subject: Re: [edk2-rfc] [RFC] Create supported branch from edk2-stable* tag (Required to address critical bug BZ3111)
> > >
> > > Hi Mike,
> > >
> > > This looks fine to me.
> > > I will add a potential tweak that I won't strongly advocate for, but
> > > think should be considered:
> > > We don't technically need a branch for this; a tag could be pushed
> > > directly.
> > >
> > > On Tue, Dec 15, 2020 at 16:53:09 +0000, Kinney, Michael D wrote:
> > > > Hello,
> > > >
> > > > The following bug has been fixed on edk2/master
> > > >
> > > >
> https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fbugzilla.tianocore.org%2Fshow_bug.cgi%3Fid%3D3111&da
> ta=04%7C01%7CBret.Barkelew%40microsoft.com%7C36133f4be9b24fbec5ca08d8a12b4024%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7
> C637436554422046735%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&
> sdata=EZCqLKBAXKgq8J40GFynYtqYIyhUpU7MIlT7wT4Cs9w%3D&reserved=0
> > > >
> https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2Ftianocore%2Fedk2%2Fpull%2F1226&data=04%
> 7C01%7CBret.Barkelew%40microsoft.com%7C36133f4be9b24fbec5ca08d8a12b4024%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C63743
> 6554422056729%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&sdata=
> pQG7sjlHRxwh5mugH3vNKoZt88b%2BD7W4YHspsdb%2BQZ8%3D&reserved=0
> > > >
> > > > This bug is also considered a critical bug against edk2-stable202011. The behavior
> > > > of the Variable Lock Protocol was changed in a non-backwards compatible manner in
> > > > edk2-stable202011 and this is impacting some downstream platforms. The following
> > > > 2 commits on edk2/master restore the original behavior of the Variable Lock Protocol.
> > > >
> > > >
> https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2Ftianocore%2Fedk2%2Fpull%2F1226%2Fcommits%2F
> 893cfe2847b83da74f53858d6acaa15a348bad7c&data=04%7C01%7CBret.Barkelew%40microsoft.com%7C36133f4be9b24fbec5ca08d8a12b40
> 24%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C637436554422056729%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2l
> uMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&sdata=RiNVhyT3fmoVRtLP0fJqbuP1Ow26tDM31J1O6%2B01wMs%3D&reserved=0
> > > >
> https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2Ftianocore%2Fedk2%2Fpull%2F1226%2Fcommits%2F
> 16491ba6a6e9a91cedeeed45bc0fbdfde49f7968&data=04%7C01%7CBret.Barkelew%40microsoft.com%7C36133f4be9b24fbec5ca08d8a12b40
> 24%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C637436554422056729%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2l
> uMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&sdata=DpZO7U2yoqD%2BK%2F6OxIZoI%2FbIDMbtRr7UBMCBl9PxGkQ%3D&reserved=0
> > > >
> > > > The request here is to create a supported branch from edk2-stable202011 tag and apply
> > > > these 2 commits as critical bug fixes on the supported branch.
> > > >
> > > > Since we started using the edk2-stable* tag process, there has not been a request to create
> > > > a supported branch from one of those tags. As a result, there are a couple opens that
> > > > need to be addressed:
> > > >
> > > > 1) Supported branch naming convention.
> > > >
> > > > Proposal: stable/edk2-stable*
> > > > Example: stable/edk2-stable202011
> > >
> > > For the bikeshedding part, if we're doing the branches, I support
> > > using the stable/ prefix, but I also think this obviates the need to
> > > include the word stable in the portion after /.
> > > Since branches unlike tags don't have global namespace, I also think
> > > there is no need for the edk2 portion of the name.
> > > So an example branch name could be:
> > > stable/202011
> > >
> > > > 2) CI requirements for supported branches.
> > > >
> > > > Proposal: Update .azurepipelines yml files to also trigger on stable/* branches
> > > > and update GitHub settings so stable/* branches are protected branches.
> > >
> > > This would of course mandate the use of branches.
> > >
> > > > 3) Release requirements for supported branches.
> > > >
> > > > Proposal: If there are a significant number of critical fixes applied to
> > > > a stable/edk2-stable* branch, then a request for a release can be made that
> > > > would trigger focused testing of the supported branch and creation of a new
> > > > release. If all testing passes, then a tag is created on the stable/edk2-stable*
> > > > branch and a release is created on GitHub that summarizes the set of critical
> > > > fixes and the testing performed.
> > > >
> > > > Proposal: edk2-stable<YYYY><MM>.<XX>
> > > > Example : edk2-stable201111.01
> > >
> > > Sounds good to me.
> > >
> > > Best Regards,
> > >
> > > Leif
> > >
> > > > Please let me know if you have any feedback or comments on this proposal. The goal
> > > > is to close on this topic this week.
> > > >
> > > > Thank you,
> > > >
> > > > Mike
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
>
>
>
>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: [edk2-rfc] [RFC] Create supported branch from edk2-stable* tag (Required to address critical bug BZ3111)
2020-12-15 19:39 ` Leif Lindholm
2020-12-15 20:42 ` Michael D Kinney
@ 2020-12-17 13:33 ` Laszlo Ersek
1 sibling, 0 replies; 7+ messages in thread
From: Laszlo Ersek @ 2020-12-17 13:33 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Leif Lindholm, Bret Barkelew
Cc: Kinney, Michael D, rfc@edk2.groups.io, devel@edk2.groups.io,
gaoliming@byosoft.com.cn, Andrew Fish (afish@apple.com),
Sean Brogan
On 12/15/20 20:39, Leif Lindholm wrote:
> Makes sense. Let's go with the branch.
>
> Mike: yes, that was what I was suggesting wrt cherry-picking and pushing.
Sounds good to me as well, thanks!
Laszlo
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2020-12-17 13:34 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2020-12-15 16:53 [RFC] Create supported branch from edk2-stable* tag (Required to address critical bug BZ3111) Michael D Kinney
2020-12-15 17:16 ` Leif Lindholm
2020-12-15 18:56 ` [edk2-rfc] " Michael D Kinney
2020-12-15 19:06 ` Bret Barkelew
2020-12-15 19:39 ` Leif Lindholm
2020-12-15 20:42 ` Michael D Kinney
2020-12-17 13:33 ` Laszlo Ersek
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox