develop branch

[joeflack4]

Overview

@matentzn I had a meeting with @twhetzel and she came up with a great idea that we decided to move forward with. I always thought it was strange that we did not have a develop branch. It would probably solve more problems than we realized. Consider this comment:

Never ever again do we merge a branch unless a full run of the pipeline was successful. I can be responsible for the runs until we have a runner on GCP.

Trish brings up that this issue is likely solved by a develop branch. If for some reason we feel the need to merge a PR before the full pipeline has been successfully run, then nothing will break on the production build (main) if we simply merge into develop. We would merge to develop and then could run it on that branch from wherever (local, Nico's virtual machine, GCP, etc).

Sub-tasks

• 1. Create develop
• 2. What to do w/ currently open PRs?
• 3. Default branch
• 4. SOP for feature branch development workflow #405

1. Create develop

a. Create a new develop branch
b. Rename main->develop, and make a new main branch

I advise 'b'. See discussion in: What to do w/ currently open PRs?

2. What to do w/ currently open PRs?

a. Merge them in main, and possibly rebase develop.
b. Rename main->develop, and make a new main branch

I originally thinking 'a' since it felt safer, but I now think 'b' is much better. All our PRs will automatically be updated to merged into develop. See more in Details.

Details

It looks like renaming the branch in GitHub is pretty safe, and GitHub has nice UX around this. See: article

Just need to rename local branches after:

Also I just did a backup of the main branch locally just in case.

3. Default branch

If we rename main to develop, I think it will stay as the default branch. This means that even when we create a new main, develop will still be the default.

I haven't thought through or researched the pros/cons for this. Normally, in my experience, main is the default. However for TermHub we've had develop as our default for over a year with no problems.

[twhetzel]

Just in case this issue is read before Slack by Nico, please do not re-name the main branch.

[matentzn]

Interesting suggestion, I agree in principle but we should discuss this and the associated SOPs in a call where we are all present!

[joeflack4]

@twhetzel Did you guys get to discuss this at your meeting on Monday? Were you convinced by my arguments on the merits of renaming main -> develop as exposited in 2. What to do w/ currently open PRs??

@matentzn Some thoughts / suggestions since now I only meet with you biweekly and we have a very crammed agenda.

In general I'd like to agree w/ discussing together. But I would consider deferring to Trish on the workflow, or otherwise rather than discuss on my call w/ you, make time otherwise (you & trish 1on1's or at a Friday meeting).

Another alternative: You can defer to Trish and me if we want to set up an SOP (just for mondo-ingest I guess) and you then our meeting with you would be just to review and tweak that.

I guess this isn't really too time sensitive though.

[twhetzel]

@matentzn agreed. There are some working processes we need to discuss and be aligned on, a few more than I realized initially based on the content of this repo.

[joeflack4]

Today we created the develop branch and changed the base of my 2 ICD11 PRs to develop. We left the other PRs as pointing to main and Nico said he plans to deal with that.

We left the default branch as main. The SOP (#405) is still in the works.