[RFC] Create supported branch from edk2-stable* tag (Required to address critical bug BZ3111)

[RFC] Create supported branch from edk2-stable* tag (Required to address critical bug BZ3111)

[Michael D Kinney]

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

Re: [RFC] Create supported branch from edk2-stable* tag (Required to address critical bug BZ3111)

[Leif Lindholm]

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

Re: [edk2-rfc] [RFC] Create supported branch from edk2-stable* tag (Required to address critical bug BZ3111)

[Michael D Kinney]

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
> 
> 
> 
> 

Re: [edk2-rfc] [RFC] Create supported branch from edk2-stable* tag (Required to address critical bug BZ3111)

[Bret Barkelew]

[-- 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&amp;data=04%7C01%7CBret.Barkelew%40microsoft.com%7C36133f4be9b24fbec5ca08d8a12b4024%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C637436554422046735%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&amp;sdata=EZCqLKBAXKgq8J40GFynYtqYIyhUpU7MIlT7wT4Cs9w%3D&amp;reserved=0
> >     https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2Ftianocore%2Fedk2%2Fpull%2F1226&amp;data=04%7C01%7CBret.Barkelew%40microsoft.com%7C36133f4be9b24fbec5ca08d8a12b4024%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C637436554422056729%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&amp;sdata=pQG7sjlHRxwh5mugH3vNKoZt88b%2BD7W4YHspsdb%2BQZ8%3D&amp;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&amp;data=04%7C01%7CBret.Barkelew%40microsoft.com%7C36133f4be9b24fbec5ca08d8a12b4024%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C637436554422056729%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&amp;sdata=RiNVhyT3fmoVRtLP0fJqbuP1Ow26tDM31J1O6%2B01wMs%3D&amp;reserved=0
> >     https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2Ftianocore%2Fedk2%2Fpull%2F1226%2Fcommits%2F16491ba6a6e9a91cedeeed45bc0fbdfde49f7968&amp;data=04%7C01%7CBret.Barkelew%40microsoft.com%7C36133f4be9b24fbec5ca08d8a12b4024%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C637436554422056729%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&amp;sdata=DpZO7U2yoqD%2BK%2F6OxIZoI%2FbIDMbtRr7UBMCBl9PxGkQ%3D&amp;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 --]

Re: [edk2-rfc] [RFC] Create supported branch from edk2-stable* tag (Required to address critical bug BZ3111)

[Leif Lindholm]

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&amp;data=04%7C01%7CBret.Barkelew%40microsoft.com%7C36133f4be9b24fbec5ca08d8a12b4024%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C637436554422046735%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&amp;sdata=EZCqLKBAXKgq8J40GFynYtqYIyhUpU7MIlT7wT4Cs9w%3D&amp;reserved=0
> > >     https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2Ftianocore%2Fedk2%2Fpull%2F1226&amp;data=04%7C01%7CBret.Barkelew%40microsoft.com%7C36133f4be9b24fbec5ca08d8a12b4024%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C637436554422056729%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&amp;sdata=pQG7sjlHRxwh5mugH3vNKoZt88b%2BD7W4YHspsdb%2BQZ8%3D&amp;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&amp;data=04%7C01%7CBret.Barkelew%40microsoft.com%7C36133f4be9b24fbec5ca08d8a12b4024%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C637436554422056729%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&amp;sdata=RiNVhyT3fmoVRtLP0fJqbuP1Ow26tDM31J1O6%2B01wMs%3D&amp;reserved=0
> > >     https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2Ftianocore%2Fedk2%2Fpull%2F1226%2Fcommits%2F16491ba6a6e9a91cedeeed45bc0fbdfde49f7968&amp;data=04%7C01%7CBret.Barkelew%40microsoft.com%7C36133f4be9b24fbec5ca08d8a12b4024%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C637436554422056729%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&amp;sdata=DpZO7U2yoqD%2BK%2F6OxIZoI%2FbIDMbtRr7UBMCBl9PxGkQ%3D&amp;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
> >
> >
> > 
> >
> 

Re: [edk2-rfc] [RFC] Create supported branch from edk2-stable* tag (Required to address critical bug BZ3111)

[Michael D Kinney]

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&amp;da
> ta=04%7C01%7CBret.Barkelew%40microsoft.com%7C36133f4be9b24fbec5ca08d8a12b4024%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7
> C637436554422046735%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&amp;
> sdata=EZCqLKBAXKgq8J40GFynYtqYIyhUpU7MIlT7wT4Cs9w%3D&amp;reserved=0
> > > >
> https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2Ftianocore%2Fedk2%2Fpull%2F1226&amp;data=04%
> 7C01%7CBret.Barkelew%40microsoft.com%7C36133f4be9b24fbec5ca08d8a12b4024%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C63743
> 6554422056729%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&amp;sdata=
> pQG7sjlHRxwh5mugH3vNKoZt88b%2BD7W4YHspsdb%2BQZ8%3D&amp;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&amp;data=04%7C01%7CBret.Barkelew%40microsoft.com%7C36133f4be9b24fbec5ca08d8a12b40
> 24%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C637436554422056729%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2l
> uMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&amp;sdata=RiNVhyT3fmoVRtLP0fJqbuP1Ow26tDM31J1O6%2B01wMs%3D&amp;reserved=0
> > > >
> https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2Ftianocore%2Fedk2%2Fpull%2F1226%2Fcommits%2F
> 16491ba6a6e9a91cedeeed45bc0fbdfde49f7968&amp;data=04%7C01%7CBret.Barkelew%40microsoft.com%7C36133f4be9b24fbec5ca08d8a12b40
> 24%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C637436554422056729%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2l
> uMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&amp;sdata=DpZO7U2yoqD%2BK%2F6OxIZoI%2FbIDMbtRr7UBMCBl9PxGkQ%3D&amp;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
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> 
> 
> 
> 

Re: [edk2-rfc] [RFC] Create supported branch from edk2-stable* tag (Required to address critical bug BZ3111)

[Laszlo Ersek]

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