Skip to content

Latest commit

 

History

History
160 lines (106 loc) · 5.11 KB

HACKING.md

File metadata and controls

160 lines (106 loc) · 5.11 KB
Raw

Conventions? Are you kidding? OK fine.

Code Branching Model

The main branch is the development branch, and stable releases are tagged either from there, or from VERSION.x branches, created as needed, for example 0.33.x.

Any branch with a "tmp/" prefix might be rebased (often), so keep that in mind when using or depending on one.

Any branch with a "tmp/review/" prefix corresponds to a patchset submitted to the mailing list. We try to maintain these branches to make the review process easier for those not as familiar with patches via email.

Current Trajectory

Now that we've finished the 0.33 release, we're working on 0.34, and although we're not certain which new features will be included, we're considering:

  • Migrating hashsplitting to C.

  • Automatically splitting trees to avoid having to save large tree objects for large directories even if only a few files have changed or been added (e.g. maildirs).

  • Moving all of the compoents of the index to sqlite. Right now the main index is an mmapped file, and the hard link and metadata databases are pickled. As a result the index isn't transactional and suffers from bugs caused by "skew" across the components.

  • Better VFS performance for large repositories (i.e. fuse, ls, web...).

  • Better VFS caching.

  • Index improvements.

  • Incremental indexing via inotify.

  • Smarter (and quieter) handling of cross-filesystem metadata.

  • Encryption.

  • Support for alternate remote storage APIs.

If you have the time and inclination, please help review patches posted to the list, or post your own. (See "ways to help" below.)

More specific ways to help

Testing -- yes please.

With respect to patches, bup development is handled via the mailing list, and all patches should be sent to the list for review (see "Submitting Patches" below).

In most cases, we try to wait until we have at least one or two "Reviewed-by:" replies to a patch posted to the list before incorporating it into main, so reviews are an important way to help. We also love a good "Tested-by:" -- the more the merrier.

Testing

Individual tests can be run via

./pytest TEST

For example:

./pytest test/int/test_git.py
./pytest test/ext/test-ftp

If you have the xdist module installed, then you can specify its -n option to run the tests in parallel (e.g. ./pytest -nauto ...), or you can specify -j to make, which will be translated to xdist with -j becoming -nauto and -jN becoming -nN.

Internal tests that test bup's code directly are located in test/int, and external tests that test bup from the outside, typically by running the executable, are located in test/ext.

Currently, all pytests must be located in either test/ext or test/int. Internal test filenames must match test_.py, and external tests must be located in text/ext and their filenames must match test- (see test/ext/conftest.py for the handling of the latter). Any paths matching those criteria will be automatically collected by pytest.

Some aspects of the environment are automatically restored after each test via fixtures in conftest.py, including the state of the environment variables and the working directory; the latter is reset to the top of the source tree.

Submitting patches

As mentioned, all patches should be posted to the mailing list for review, and must be "signed off" by the author before official inclusion (see ./SIGNED-OFF-BY). You can create a "signed off" set of patches in ./patches, ready for submission to the list, like this:

git format-patch -s -o patches origin/main

which will include all of the patches since origin/main on your current branch. Then you can send them to the list like this:

git send-email --to bup-list@googlegroups.com --compose patches/*

The use of --compose will cause git to ask you to edit a cover letter that will be sent as the first message.

It's also possible to handle everything in one step:

git send-email -s --to bup-list@googlegroups.com --compose origin/main

and you can add --annotate if you'd like to review or edit each patch before it's sent.

For single patches, this might be easier:

git send-email -s --to bup-list@googlegroups.com --annotate -n1 HEAD

which will send the top patch on the current branch, and will stop to allow you to add comments. You can add comments to the section with the diffstat without affecting the commit message.

Of course, unless your machine is set up to handle outgoing mail locally, you may need to configure git to be able to send mail. See git-send-email(1) for further details.

Oh, and we do have a ./CODINGSTYLE, hobgoblins and all, though don't let that scare you off. We're not all that fierce.

Even More Generally

It's not like we have a lot of hard and fast rules, but some of the ideas here aren't altogether terrible:

http://www.kernel.org/doc/Documentation/SubmittingPatches

In particular, we've been paying at least some attention to the bits regarding Acked-by:, Reported-by:, Tested-by: and Reviewed-by:.