public inbox for devel@edk2.groups.io
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Laszlo Ersek" <lersek@redhat.com>
To: devel@edk2.groups.io, phoenix.liyi@Huawei.com
Subject: Re: [edk2-devel] Requestion for LTS version on EDK2
Date: Fri, 19 Apr 2019 01:26:46 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <facd0cf3-d9f9-0278-e972-d59cd2c7b541@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <13372.1555571870534300928@groups.io>

On 04/18/19 09:17, liyi 00215672 wrote:
> Hi Guys,
> Backgroud: If we choose one stable-tag as our own UEFI codebase, however after 3 years, there are so many new features(but we don't need) will be added into EDK2 main tree.
> 
> Requestion: Could EDK2 community plan or maintain "LTS version" concept like Linux? On LTS version , we only make bug fix or security-related.

This question can be approached in two ways.


(1) Introduce stable *branches* to the development model. Those would be
forked off at the stable tags (well, at some of them).

Stable branches are pretty usual with other open source projects.
Unfortunately, they need a bunch of additional work. So when anyone
asks, "can you maintain a stable branch for us", the default answer is
to ask back, "can you contribute human resources for stable branch
maintenance". :)

In addition, releases (tags) on stable branches need heavier process and
heavier testing. Regressions on stable branches are really bad. The
community needs to invent (or, well, "steal") rules for what qualifies
for stable branches and what doesn't.


(2) I'm a very strong believer in one grand unified git history for
*everything* in edk2. (Personally I even think that edk2-platforms
should exist within edk2, but I digress.) The reason is very simple: if
you want to ignore progress on some modules, you can easily do that [*]
even if the git repo is comprehensive. However, if you split things to
separate repos, then *reconstructing* a comprehensive history (and
navigating / bisect it for bug analysis) is basically *impossible*.

Put differently, it is easy to throw away information if you don't need
it, but you can't conjure it up from thin air when you do need it.


[*] If you decide you don't want module Foo to advance beyond commit Bar
for you, then you can simply check out the Foo module into your git
working directory (and index) at commit Bar, just before you launch your
build:

  git checkout Bar -- Path/To/Module/Foo

You can repeat this command arbitrarily many times, with different
commits for different modules, before you launch the build.

Thanks
Laszlo

  reply	other threads:[~2019-04-18 23:26 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-04-18  7:17 Requestion for LTS version on EDK2 liyi 00215672
2019-04-18 23:26 ` Laszlo Ersek [this message]
2019-04-19 11:11   ` [edk2-devel] " liyi 00215672
2019-04-23 11:10     ` Laszlo Ersek
2019-04-23 14:30       ` 答复: " liyi 00215672
2019-04-24  9:57         ` Laszlo Ersek
2019-04-23 17:52   ` rebecca
2019-04-24  0:46     ` 答复: " liyi 00215672
2019-04-24 10:01     ` Laszlo Ersek

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-list from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=facd0cf3-d9f9-0278-e972-d59cd2c7b541@redhat.com \
    --to=devel@edk2.groups.io \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox