canonical-ci-engineering team mailing list archive

[Vincent Ladeuil <vila+ci@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

>>>>> Chris Johnston <chris.johnston@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:

    > I seem to remember that when we were in the beginning stages of
    > discussing/planning the new CI Engine that we had discussed having each
    > 'micro service' as its own branch or potentially its own project. In my
    > opinion, each service should be in a separate branch.  Keeping everything
    > in the same branch is going to make the bzr log absolutely horrible. If I'm
    > looking for the last commit to a certain part of the engine, if the commit
    > message doesn't explicitly state that it did something to that part of the
    > engine, I may miss it entirely when searching. With each service being it's
    > own branch, every commit will be related to a single service, and things
    > will be much easier to follow.

    > I actually think that each service should be in its own project as well,
    > but I'll settle for atleast separating things into their own branches. By
    > separating each service into it's own project, it would be much easier for
    > each of us to follow bugs and MPs related specifically to the code we are
    > working on.

    > Thoughts?

I think that has been the plan all along but we settled for a single
project to start with for simplicity. But as soon as people feel their
service is mature enough for its own project they should spin-off
(adding the new project to https://launchpad.net/ubuntu-ci-services).

During phase 0 though, I think the documentation is still better kept in
https://launchpad.net/ubuntu-ci-services-itself as there is still a lot
of moving parts in the dependencies and API and tracking them across
multiple projects would be error-prone.

Now, regarding bzr, the log itself may be hard to read but you can use
annotate on a file in the appropriate directory to get a more focused
view.

I use qlog and qannotate (from the qbzr plugin) for that.

  Vincent