Puppet environment name / branch name

[David Caro]

On Thu 21 Nov 2013 03:57:27 PM CET, Itamar Heim wrote:
> On 11/21/2013 04:46 PM, David Caro wrote:
>> On Thu 21 Nov 2013 03:03:00 PM CET, Itamar Heim wrote:
>>> On 11/21/2013 03:29 PM, Ohad Basan wrote:
>>>> +1
>>>>
>>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>>>> From: "Ewoud Kohl van Wijngaarden" <ewoud+ovirt at kohlvanwijngaarden.nl>
>>>>> To: infra at ovirt.org
>>>>> Sent: Wednesday, November 20, 2013 8:27:39 PM
>>>>> Subject: Puppet environment name / branch name
>>>>>
>>>>> Hello,
>>>>>
>>>>> I just deployed r10k to be the deployment method and it works generally
>>>>> well. One problem is that it maps branches one to one. Currently I
>>>>> worked around this by making a symlink, but I think we should rename our
>>>>> master branch to production. Opinions?
>>>
>>> is that common? usually master is named master.
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Infra mailing list
>>> Infra at ovirt.org
>>> http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/infra
>>
>> Maybe it's better to change puppet config to use master as the
>> 'production' environment source of manifests. I say that because it's
>> usually a mess to have a branch that it's not the master as master...
>> (@work we use development as master in one of the repos, and I always
>> submit a patch or two a month to master instead xd)
>
> well, one other though is that if you ever intend to have more than a single
> branch, master is usually not the stable production one...
>

I suppose that it depends on the flow the company/project uses, in my 
last job we used master as the stable branch, and we had devel as the 
non-stable branch and one branch for each major version we supported, 
but master was always the latest major version production-ready code. 
Then on master we had  tags for each release and so on. I suppose they 
get the idea from gitflow 
http://nvie.com/posts/a-successful-git-branching-model/

But yes, bad habits are hard to get rid of. Any way is fine for me, but 
if no one has any reason for the other way, I vote for using master 
instead of production.

--
David Caro

Red Hat S.L.
Continuous Integration Engineer - EMEA ENG Virtualization R&D

Email: dcaro at redhat.com
Web: www.redhat.com
RHT Global #: 82-62605

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 490 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.ovirt.org/pipermail/infra/attachments/20131121/70f38b90/attachment.sig>