Helm 3.0 Development Branch


Matt Butcher
 

As we kick of Helm 3 development, we want to make sure that (a) it is easy to do work on the Helm 3 codebase, and (b) we don't break the Helm experience for existing users.

After doing some investigation, we discovered that many people clone the `master` branch and expect a working Helm 2 instance, so for development on helm 3, we propose initially doing the development work on a separate branch, and then merging that branch to master at `helm-3.0.0-beta.1` (a.k.a. The Distant Future).

So that leaves us with a name for the Helm 3 development branch. Our main two considerations for naming are (a) make it obvious, and (b) don't let it screw up SemVer-based clients like dep and glide.

We're proposing: `dev-v3` as the branch name.

How does that sound?


Michelle Noorali
 

Sounds good to me!

Michelle Noorali


From: cncf-kubernetes-helm@... <cncf-kubernetes-helm@...> on behalf of Matt Butcher via Lists.Cncf.Io <matt.butcher=microsoft.com@...>
Sent: Thursday, March 29, 2018 1:09:57 PM
To: cncf-kubernetes-helm@...
Cc: cncf-kubernetes-helm@...
Subject: [cncf-kubernetes-helm] Helm 3.0 Development Branch
 
As we kick of Helm 3 development, we want to make sure that (a) it is easy to do work on the Helm 3 codebase, and (b) we don't break the Helm experience for existing users.

After doing some investigation, we discovered that many people clone the `master` branch and expect a working Helm 2 instance, so for development on helm 3, we propose initially doing the development work on a separate branch, and then merging that branch to master at `helm-3.0.0-beta.1` (a.k.a. The Distant Future).

So that leaves us with a name for the Helm 3 development branch. Our main two considerations for naming are (a) make it obvious, and (b) don't let it screw up SemVer-based clients like dep and glide.

We're proposing: `dev-v3` as the branch name.

How does that sound?