From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail-wm1-f47.google.com (mail-wm1-f47.google.com [209.85.128.47]) by mx.groups.io with SMTP id smtpd.web10.595.1608052612147324893 for ; Tue, 15 Dec 2020 09:16:52 -0800 Authentication-Results: mx.groups.io; dkim=pass header.i=@nuviainc-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com header.s=20150623 header.b=CfrBqPk0; spf=pass (domain: nuviainc.com, ip: 209.85.128.47, mailfrom: leif@nuviainc.com) Received: by mail-wm1-f47.google.com with SMTP id y23so19275898wmi.1 for ; Tue, 15 Dec 2020 09:16:51 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=nuviainc-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=YfnzOp8nxNgWnzKnYwKA0bUa+L9/MA3/sdtAu80O9qo=; b=CfrBqPk0xOYQ4lIf3S77GMDfytYJv3h2PF0HhlSK5yoB0g7WC63CwO/qBp5gX8DgUj DcV3VSiUHZsx/hju+22usCeNFYuBjaUVvKHB0+u57EBgu8WGohLtKf2k9XCbs3IhUHZY hgpN0NP7YRRm6xTu6B6oK/n0MXugigt4CNZWbReUrWrt89XScD8Fa0tGmCRsZpIlouZt FziiGFhKg2dc8F7cANbYgVr97OzMQYNKDN47f7UQXBkEk1aNQ6Xm/9Mkoe2f0gLXPeRj BeVsRAtzTZaNMx6OPL/pAeBsqnp+KEJ83eE0shR+1xA9UbUB24zciEkX1CFyY36LTbS3 VffQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=YfnzOp8nxNgWnzKnYwKA0bUa+L9/MA3/sdtAu80O9qo=; b=RfHgdfryDuGlgPDRc5ebnug+DaFsq5yLOJUNnJ+3/w9QJN44LqPJRvTyTZM8UDV+Bd 7yTqOzibqDIAiaqoLzEOvQ3wO6lmBN0MZyNENEy+odVjoNagLNI8/7hMKX/hpoJ2JcI+ yRcFe54aOWl2rlhFQA5bv+VszzAhFCN0gIg0eqcRvUxcQHfnvnso6OzAJwE/UinFlqyZ qN+HHP4ektXIwP+fdHMq98FPnNMFrS5XakvAZZYUqzkpWTavoxRECGsmbTomOP2IBDwu iYgE8c0Apn9KrvNbtotu1hABRKe8fm0XTMPGnDFwHpiX3lf/hSYmwbWDIeppngasQgfB Ws0Q== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530zHW6Xx07vP9NUzpzWBPBEeZ/uS90cdR3QgXWNZnSFfCjiPjkz qeWDCMQavtbB67uEDcsbuoDogQ== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJyk8HEipWKJQZSxasNtd7Ubxzcw1hdLJr5FegjyHhIbuUmrOHvA/VP1MiXiEGRbsSGMiaG1/g== X-Received: by 2002:a05:600c:2116:: with SMTP id u22mr33720121wml.174.1608052610581; Tue, 15 Dec 2020 09:16:50 -0800 (PST) Return-Path: Received: from vanye (cpc1-cmbg19-2-0-cust915.5-4.cable.virginm.net. [82.27.183.148]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id l11sm28147752wrt.23.2020.12.15.09.16.49 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Tue, 15 Dec 2020 09:16:50 -0800 (PST) Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2020 17:16:48 +0000 From: "Leif Lindholm" 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)" , 'Sean Brogan' , 'Bret Barkelew' Subject: Re: [RFC] Create supported branch from edk2-stable* tag (Required to address critical bug BZ3111) Message-ID: <20201215171648.GZ1664@vanye> References: MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline 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. > 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