Synchronization of "development" branches between ESMValTool and ESMValTool-private about esmvaltool

[nielsdrost]

Yes, I think it makes sense to keep the "master" and "development" branches of ESMValTool synchronized at all times.

This would mean every pull request to either branches in either repo's would need to be followed up with a git pull-push synchronize step. Perhaps we should make a script.

[bulli92]

don't know how to do it via github, But one can easily sync in principle by having two "remotes" locally and sync there and then push to each of repos again.

…

On 6/26/17 1:17 PM, Nikolay Koldunov wrote: The possible problem is that private and public repositories are not linked in github, at least I can not make PR to one from another. Maybe I don't have enough rights. — You are receiving this because you commented. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#71 (comment)>, or mute the thread <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ACt0Cy-zcuZvAqTZ7iUUfwE8x3zI7CQJks5sH5MygaJpZM4OFIzp>.

[bulli92]

Agree, only point is that we need to ensure that also the devbranch is a running version.
But that's what is envisaged anyway.

[koldunovn]

The possible problem is that private and public repositories are not linked in github, at least I can not make PR to one from another. Maybe I don't have enough rights.

[nielsdrost]

Yes, this is an unfortunate side effect of the workaround we used to get two copies of the same repo into one GitHub organization with different public/private settings: as far as GitHub is concerned, these two repo's are not related in any way.

@bulli92 is right in that on the command line it is only a few lines (though you have to be careful to get it right not to mess up some branch)

I discussed this with @bjoernbroetz before (actually before the github was setup). I guess we should write that down somewhere :-)

[koldunovn]

Can someone then, please, take an action on this?

[bulli92]

@mattiarighi @axel-lauer @bjoernbroetz @veyring

can you please comment on this. I think we need some general agreement and responsibility assignment.

But first we would need to agree on the overall procedure to always keep the masters and dev's in sync. Do you agree with such an approach?

[axel-lauer]

The master / development branches have been synchronized (September 1, 2017).

For the future, we developed and tested a set of instructions for the core development team how to synchronize the master and development branches in the different repositories. Currently, the synchronization has to be done by hand. The current strategy is that synchronization is done as soon as one of the master or development branches is modified (in any of the repositories). The core team member performing the updates of the master / development branch would be the primary person responsible for synchronizing the branches / repositories. The instructions are available for discussion and further refinement here on the wiki.