public inbox for gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* [gentoo-dev] [RFC pre-GLEP] Gentoo Git Workflow
@ 2017-07-25  8:05 Michał Górny
  2017-07-25  8:23 ` Nicolas Bock
                   ` (15 more replies)
  0 siblings, 16 replies; 56+ messages in thread
From: Michał Górny @ 2017-07-25  8:05 UTC (permalink / raw
  To: gentoo-dev

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 19514 bytes --]

Hi, everyone.

There have been multiple attempts at grasping this but none so far
resulted in something official and indisputable. At the same time, we
end having to point our users at semi-official guides which change
in unpredictable ways.

Here's the current draft:
https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/User:MGorny/GLEP:Git

The basic idea is that the GLEP provides basic guidelines for using git,
and then we write a proper manual on top of it (right now, all the pages
about it end up as a mix of requirements and a partial git manual).

What do you think about it? Is there anything else that needs being
covered?

Copy of the markup for inline comments follows.

---

{{GLEP
|Number=xx
|Title=Gentoo Git Workflow
|Type=Standards Track
|Status=Draft
|Author=Michał Górny <mgorny@gentoo.org>
}}

==Abstract==
This GLEP specifies basic standards and recommendations for using git
with the Gentoo ebuild repository. It covers only Gentoo-specific
policies, and is not meant to be a complete guide.

==Motivation==
Although the main Gentoo repository is using git for two years already,
developers still lack official documentation on how to use git
consistently. Most of the developers learn spoken standards from others
and follow them. This eventually brings consistency to some extent but
is suboptimal. Furthermore, it results in users having to learn things
the hard way instead of having proper documentation to follow.

There were a few attempts to standardize git use over the time. Most
noteworthy are [[Gentoo git workflow]] and [[Gentoo GitHub]] articles.
However, they are not any kind of official standards, and they have too
broad focus to become one. There was also an initial GLEP attempt but it
never even reached the draft stage.

This GLEP aims to finally provide basic standardization for the use of
git in the Gentoo repository. It aims to focus purely on Gentoo-specific 
standards and not git usage in general. It doesn't mean to be a complete
guide but a formal basis on top of which official guides could be
created.

==Specification==
===Branching model===
The main branch of the Gentoo repository is the <kbd>master</kbd>
branch. All Gentoo developers push their work straight to the master
branch, provided that the commits meet the minimal quality standards.
The master branch is also used straight for continous user repository
deployment.

Since multiple developers work on master concurrently, they may be
required to rebase multiple times before being able to push. Developers
are requested not to use workflows that could prevent others from
pushing, e.g. pushing single commits frequently instead of staging them
and using a single push.

Developers can use additional branches to facilitate review and testing
of long-term projects of larger scale. However, since git fetches all
branches by default, they should be used scarcely. For smaller projects,
local branches or repository forks are preferred.

Unless stated otherwise, the rules set by this specification apply to
the master branch only. The development branches can use relaxed rules.

Rewriting history (i.e. force pushes) of the master branch is forbidden.

===Merge commits===
The use of merge commits in the Gentoo repository is strongly
discouraged. Usually it is preferable to rebase instead. However, the
developers are allowed to use merge commits in justified cases. Merge
commits can be only used to merge additional branches, the use of
implicit <kbd>git pull</kbd> merges is entirely forbidden.

In a merge commit that is committed straight to the Gentoo repository,
the first parent is expected to reference an actual Gentoo commit
preceding the merge, while the remaining parents can be used to
reference external repositories. The commits following the first parent
are required to conform to this specification alike regular Gentoo
commits. The additional commits following other parents can use relaxed
rules.

===OpenPGP signatures===
Each commit in the Gentoo repository must be signed using the
committer's OpenPGP key. Furthermore, each push to the repository must
be signed using the key belonging to the developer performing the push
(matched via the SSH key).

The requirements for OpenPGP keys are covered by [[GLEP:63|GLEP 63]].

===Splitting commits===
Git commits are lightweight, and the developers are encouraged to split
their commits to improve readability and the ability of reverting
specific sub-changes. When choosing how to split the commits, the
developers should consider the following three rules:
# Use atomic commits — one commit per logical change.
# Split commits at logical unit (package, eclass, profile…) boundaries.
# Avoid creating commits that are 'broken' — e.g. are incomplete, have
uninstallable packages.

It is technically impossible to always respect all of the three rules,
so developers have to balance between them at their own discretion. Side
changes that are implied by other change (e.g. revbump due to some
change) should be included in the first commit requiring them. Commits
should be ordered to avoid breakage, and follow logical ordering
whenever possible.

Examples:
* When doing a version bump, it is usually not reasonable to split every
necessary logical change into separate commit since the interim commits
would correspond to a broken package. However, if the package has a live
ebuild, it ''might'' be reasonable to perform split logical changes on
the live ebuild, then create a release as another logical step.
* When doing one or more changes that require a revision bump, bump the
revision in the commit including the first change. Split the changes
into multiple logical commits without further revision bumps — since
they are going to be pushed in a single push, the user will not be
exposed to interim state.
* When adding a new version of a package that should be masked, you can
include the {{Path|package.mask}} edit in the commit adding it.
Alternatively, you can add the mask in a split commit ''preceding'' the
bump.
* When doing a minor change to a large number of packages, it is
reasonable to do so in a single commit. However, when doing a major
change (e.g. a version bump), it is better to split commits on package
boundaries.

===Commit messages===
A standard git commit message consists of three parts, in order: a
summary line, an optional body and an optional set of tags. The parts
are separated by a single empty line.

The summary line is included in the short logs (<kbd>git log --
oneline</kbd>, gitweb, GitHub, mail subject) and therefore should
provide a short yet accurate description of the change. The summary line
starts with a logical unit name, followed by a colon, a space and a
short description of the most important changes. If a bug is associated
with a change, then it should be included in the summary line as
<kbd>#nnnnnn</kbd> or likewise. The summary line must not exceed 69
characters, and must not be wrapped.

The suggested logical unit name formats are:
* for a package, <kbd>category/package: …</kbd>;
* for an eclass, <kbd>name.eclass: …</kbd>;
* for other directories or files, their path or filename (as long as a
developer reading the commit messages is able to figure out what it is)
— e.g. <kbd>licenses/foo: …</kbd>, <kbd>package.mask: …</kbd>.

The body is included in the full commit log (<kbd>git log</kbd>,
detailed commit info on gitweb/GitHub, mail body). It is optional, and
it can be used to describe the commit in more detail if the summary line
is not sufficient. It is generally a good idea to repeat the information
contained in the summary (except for the logical unit) since the summary
is frequently formatted as a title. The body should be wrapped at 72
characters. It can contain multiple paragraphs, separated by empty
lines.

The tag part is included in the full commit log as an extension to the
body. It consists of one or more lines consisting of key, followed by a
colon and a space, followed by value. Git does not enforce any
standardization of the keys, and the tag format is ''not'' meant for
machine processing.

A few tags of common use are:
* user-related tags:
** <kbd>Acked-by: Full Name <email@example.com></kbd> — commit approved
by another person (usually without detailed review),
** <kbd>Reported-by: Full Name <email@example.com></kbd>,
** <kbd>Reviewed-by: Full Name <email@example.com></kbd> — usually
indicates full review,
** <kbd>Signed-off-by: Full Name <email@example.com></kbd> — DCO
approval (not used in Gentoo right now),
** <kbd>Suggested-by: Full Name <email@example.com></kbd>, 
** <kbd>Tested-by: Full Name <email@example.com></kbd>.
* commit-related tags:
** <kbd>Fixes: commit-id (commit message)</kbd> — to indicate fixing a
previous commit,
** <kbd>Reverts: commit-id (commit message)</kbd> — to indicate
reverting a previous commit,
* bug tracker-related tags:
** <kbd>Bug: <nowiki>https://bugs.gentoo.org/NNNNNN</nowiki></kbd>; — to
reference a bug,
** <kbd>Closes: <nowiki>https://github.com/gentoo/gentoo/pull/NNNN</nowi
ki></kbd>; — to automatically close a GitHub pull request,
** <kbd>Fixes: <nowiki>https://bugs.gentoo.org/NNNNNN</nowiki></kbd>; —
to indicate a fixed bug,
* package manager tags:
** <kbd>Package-Manager: …</kbd> — used by repoman to indicate Portage
version,
** <kbd>RepoMan-Options: …</kbd> — used by repoman to indicate repoman
options.

The bug tracker-related tags can be used to extend the body message.
However, they should be skipped if the bug number is already provided in
the summary and there is no explicit body.

==Rationale==
===Branching model===
The model of multiple developers pushing concurrently to the repository
containing all packages is preserved from CVS. The developers have
discussed the possibility of using other models, in particular of using
multiple branches for developers that are afterwards automatically
merged into the master branch. However, it was determined that there is
no need to use a more complex model at the moment and the potential
problems with them outweighed the benefits.

The necessity of rebasing is a natural consequence of concurrent work,
along with the ban of reverse merge commits. Since rebasing a number of
commits can take a few seconds or even more, another developer sometimes
commits during that time, enforcing another rebase.

In the past, there were cases of developers using automated scripts
which created single commits, ran repoman and pushed them straight to
the repository. This resulted in pushes from a single developer every
10-15 seconds which made it impossible for other developers to rebase
larger commit batches. This kind of workflow is therefore strongly
discouraged.

Creating multiple short-time branches is discouraged as it implies
additional transfer for users cloning the repository and additional
maintenance burden. Since the git migration, the developers have created
a few branches on the repository, and did not maintain them. The Infra
had to query the developers about the state of the branches and clean
them up. Keeping branches local or hosting them outside Gentoo Infra
(e.g. on GitHub) reduces the burden on our users, even if the developers
do not clean after themselves.

===Merge commits===
Merge commits have been debated multiple times in various media, in
particular IRC. They have very verbose opponents whose main argument is
that they make history unreadable. At the same time, it has been
frequently pointed out that merge commits have valid use cases. To
satisfy both groups, this specification strongly discourages merge
commits but allows their use in justified cases.

Most importantly, the implicit merge commits created by <kbd>git
pull</kbd> are forbbiden. Those merges have no real value or justified
use case, and since they are created implicitly by default there have
been historical cases where developers pushed them unintentionally. They
are banned explicitly to emphasize the necessity of adjusting git
configuration to the developers.

When processing merge commits, it is important to explicitly distinguish
the parent that represents 'real' Gentoo history from the one(s) that
represent external branches. The former can either be an existing Gentoo
commit or a commit that the developer has prepared (on top of existing
Gentoo history) before merging the branch. For this reason, it is
important to enforce the full set of Gentoo policies on this parent and
the commits preceding it. On the other hand, the external branches can
be treated similarly to development branches. Relaxing the rules for
external branches also makes it possible to merge user contributions
with original user OpenPGP signatures, while adding a final developer
signature on top of the merge commit.

When using <kbd>git merge ''foo''</kbd>, the first parent represents the
current <kbd>HEAD</kbd> and the second one the merged branch. This is
the model used by the specification.

===OpenPGP signatures===
The signature requirements strictly correspond to the git setup deployed
by the Infrastructure team.

The commit signatures provide an ability to verify the authenticity of
all commits throughout the Gentoo repository history (to the point of
git conversion). The push signatures mostly serve the purpose of
additional authentication for the developer pushing a specific set of
commits.

===Splitting commits===
The goal of the commit splitting rules is to make the best use of git
while avoiding enforcing too much overhead on the developer and
optimizing to avoid interim broken commits.

Splitting commits by logical changes improves the readability and makes
it easier to revert a specific change while preserving the remaining
(irrelevant) changes. The changes done by a developer are easier to
comprehend when the reviewer can follow them in the specific order done
by the author, rather than combined with other changes.

Splitting commits on logical unit boundary was used since CVS times.
Mostly it improves readability via making it possible to include the
unit (package, eclass…) name in the commit message — so that developers
perceive what specific packages are affected by the change without
having to look into diffstat.

Requiring commits to be non-'broken' is meant to preserve a good quality
git history of the repository. This means that the users can checkout an
interim commit without risking a major problem such as a missing
dependency that is being added by the commit following it. It also makes
it safer to revert the most recent changes with reduced risk of exposing
a breakage.

Those rules partially overlap, and if that is the case, the developers
are expected to use common sense to determine the course of action that
gives the best result. Furthermore, requiring the strict following of
the rules would mean a lot of additional work for developers and a lot
of additional commits for no real benefit.

The examples are provided to make it possible for the developers to get
a 'feeling' how to work with the rules.

===Commit messages===
The basic commit message format is similar to the one used by other
projects, and provides for reasonably predictable display of results.

The summary line is meant to provide a good concise summary of the
changes. It is included in the short logs, and should include all the
information to help developer determine whether he is interested in
looking into the commit details. Including the logical unit name
accounts for the fact that most of the Gentoo commits are specific to
those units (e.g. packages). The length limit is meant to avoid wrapping
the shortlog — which could result in unreadable <kbd>git log --
oneline</kbd> or ugly mid-word ellipsis on GitHub.

The body is meant to provide the detailed information for a commit. It
is usually displayed verbatim, and the use of paragraphs along with line
wrapping is meant to improve readability. The body should include the
information contained in the summary since the two are sometimes really
disjoint, and expecting the user to read body as a continuation of
summary is confusing. For example, in <kbd>git send-email</kbd>, the
summary line is used to construct the mail's summary and is therefore
disjoint from the body.

The tag section is a traditional way of expressing quasi-machine-
readable data. However, the commit messages are not really suited for
machine use and only a few tags are actually processed by scripts. The
specification tries to provide a concise set of potentially useful tags
collected from various projects (the Linux kernel, X.org). Those tags
can be used interchangeably with plaintext explanation in the body.

The only tag defined by git itself is the <kbd>Signed-off-by</kbd> line,
that is created by <kbd>git commit -s</kbd>. However, Gentoo does not
currently enforce a DCO consistently, and therefore it is meaningless.

The only tag subject to machine processing is the <kbd>Closes</kbd> line
that is used by GitHub to automatically close pull requests (and issues
— however, Gentoo does not use GitHub's issue tracker).

All the remaining tags serve purely as a user convenience.

Historically, Gentoo has been using a few tags starting with <kbd>X-
</kbd>. However, this practice was abandoned once it has been pointed
out that git does not enforce any standard set of tags, and therefore
indicating non-standard tags is meaningless.

Gentoo developers are still frequently using <kbd>Gentoo-Bug</kbd> tag,
sometimes followed by <kbd>Gentoo-Bug-URL</kbd>. Using both
simultaneously is meaningless (they are redundant), and using the former
has no advantages over using the classic <kbd>#nnnnnn</kbd> form in the
summary or the body.

==Backwards Compatibility==
Most of the new policy will apply to the commits following its approval.
Backwards compatibility is not relevant there.

One particular point that affects commits retroactively is the OpenPGP
signing. However, it has been an obligatory requirement enforced by the
infrastructure since the git switch. Therefore, all the git history
conforms to that.

==Reference implementation==
All of the elements requiring explicit implementation on the git
infrastructure are implemented already. In particular this includes:
* blocking force pushes on the <kbd>master</kbd> branch,
* requiring signed commits on the <kbd>master</kbd> branch,
* requiring signed pushes to the repository.

The remaining elements are either non-obligatory or non-enforceable at
infrastructure level.

RepoMan suggests starting the commit message with package name since
commit [https://gitweb.gentoo.org/proj/portage.git/commit/?id=46dafadff5
8da0220511f20480b73ad09f913430
46dafadff58da0220511f20480b73ad09f913430].

==Acknowledgements==
Most of the foundations for this specification were laid out by
[[User:Hasufell|Julian Ospald (hasufell)]] in his initial version of
[[Gentoo git workflow]] article.

==Copyright==

This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike
3.0 Unported License. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creat
ivecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/.

-- 
Best regards,
Michał Górny

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 988 bytes --]

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 56+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2017-09-11  3:09 UTC | newest]

Thread overview: 56+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2017-07-25  8:05 [gentoo-dev] [RFC pre-GLEP] Gentoo Git Workflow Michał Górny
2017-07-25  8:23 ` Nicolas Bock
2017-07-25  8:49 ` Dirkjan Ochtman
2017-07-25 10:59 ` Tobias Klausmann
2017-07-25 11:49   ` Michał Górny
2017-07-25 11:25 ` Michael Orlitzky
2017-07-25 11:52   ` Michał Górny
2017-07-25 12:26     ` Michael Orlitzky
2017-07-25 13:23       ` Michał Górny
2017-07-25 16:12         ` Michael Orlitzky
2017-07-25 20:29           ` Mike Gilbert
2017-07-25 20:31             ` Michael Orlitzky
2017-07-25 20:55               ` Michał Górny
2017-07-25 22:26             ` Rich Freeman
2017-07-25 22:30               ` Michał Górny
2017-07-25 22:46                 ` Rich Freeman
2017-07-25 22:50                   ` Michał Górny
2017-07-25 13:26     ` Rich Freeman
2017-07-25 13:48       ` Michał Górny
2017-07-26  9:21         ` Ulrich Mueller
2017-07-26 17:04           ` Kristian Fiskerstrand
2017-07-26 17:20             ` Rich Freeman
2017-07-26 17:32               ` Kristian Fiskerstrand
2017-07-27  9:54               ` Kristian Fiskerstrand
2017-07-26 17:00   ` Kristian Fiskerstrand
2017-07-25 11:50 ` Jonas Stein
2017-07-25 12:28 ` [gentoo-dev] " Michael Palimaka
2017-07-25 13:36   ` Michał Górny
2017-07-26 17:05   ` Kristian Fiskerstrand
2017-07-26 22:20     ` Sam Jorna
2017-07-27  6:08     ` Daniel Campbell
2017-07-27 13:48     ` Michał Górny
2017-07-25 12:54 ` [gentoo-dev] " Joshua Kinard
2017-07-25 13:43   ` Michał Górny
2017-07-26 13:41 ` Brian Evans
2017-07-26 17:17 ` Kristian Fiskerstrand
2017-07-27 13:52   ` Michał Górny
2017-07-27 13:54     ` Kristian Fiskerstrand
2017-07-27 13:58       ` Michał Górny
2017-07-27 14:08         ` Kristian Fiskerstrand
2017-07-27 14:11           ` Michał Górny
2017-07-27 14:25             ` Kristian Fiskerstrand
2017-07-27 22:00 ` [gentoo-dev] " Duncan
2017-07-27 22:37 ` Duncan
2017-07-27 23:12 ` Duncan
2017-07-27 23:38 ` Duncan
2017-07-28  0:15 ` Duncan
2017-07-28 10:38 ` [gentoo-dev] " Andreas K. Huettel
2017-09-08 21:19 ` Rich Freeman
2017-09-09  0:00   ` Kristian Fiskerstrand
2017-09-09  7:47   ` Michał Górny
2017-09-09  9:29     ` Rich Freeman
2017-09-10  7:39     ` Daniel Campbell
2017-09-10  9:34       ` Michał Górny
2017-09-10 22:13         ` Daniel Campbell
2017-09-11  3:09           ` Dean Stephens

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox