svn

None required, but it is recommended you follow the guidelines in the dev FAQ.

bzr

No setup is required, but for much quicker and space-efficient local branching, you should create a shared repository to hold all your Python branches. A shared repository is really just a parent directory containing a .bzr directory. When bzr commits a revision, it searches from the local directory on up the file system for a .bzr directory to hold the revision. By sharing revisions across multiple branches, you cut down on the amount of disk space used. Do this:

cd ~/projects
bzr init-repo python
cd python

Now, all your Python branches should be created inside of ~/projects/python.

There are also some settings you can put in your ~/.bzr/bazaar.conf and ~/.bzr/locations.conf file to set up defaults for interacting with Python code. None of them are required, although some are recommended. E.g. I would suggest gpg signing all commits, but that might be too high a barrier for developers. Also, you can set up default push locations depending on where you want to push branches by default. If you have write access to the master branches, that push location could be code.python.org. Otherwise, it might be a free Bazaar code hosting service such as Launchpad. If Bazaar is chosen, we should decide what the policies and recommendations are.

At a minimum, I would set up your email address:

bzr whoami "Firstname Lastname <[email protected]>"

As with hg and git below, there are ways to set your email address (or really, just about any parameter) on a per-repository basis. You do this with settings in your $HOME/.bazaar/locations.conf file, which has an ini-style format as does the other DVCSs. See the Bazaar documentation for details, which mostly aren’t relevant for this discussion.

hg

Minimally, you should set your user name. To do so, create the file .hgrc in your home directory and add the following:

[ui]
username = Firstname Lastname <email.address@example.com>

If you are using Windows and your tools do not support Unix-style newlines, you can enable automatic newline translation by adding to your configuration:

[extensions]
win32text =

These options can also be set locally to a given repository by customizing <repo>/.hg/hgrc, instead of ~/.hgrc.

git

None needed. However, git supports a number of features that can smooth your work, with a little preparation. git supports setting defaults at the workspace, user, and system levels. The system level is out of scope of this PEP. The user configuration file is $HOME/.gitconfig on Unix-like systems, and the workspace configuration file is $REPOSITORY/.git/config.

You can use the git-config tool to set preferences for user.name and user.email either globally (for your system login account) or locally (to a given git working copy), or you can edit the configuration files (which have the same format as shown in the Mercurial section above).:

# my full name doesn't change
# note "--global" flag means per user
# (system-wide configuration is set with "--system")
git config --global user.name 'Firstname Lastname'
# but use my Pythonic email address
cd /path/to/python/repository
git config user.email email.address@python.example.com

If you are using Windows, you probably want to set the core.autocrlf and core.safecrlf preferences to true using git-config.:

# check out files with CRLF line endings rather than Unix-style LF only
git config --global core.autocrlf true
# scream if a transformation would be ambiguous
# (eg, a working file contains both naked LF and CRLF)
# and check them back in with the reverse transformation
git config --global core.safecrlf true

Although the repository will usually contain a .gitignore file specifying file names that rarely if ever should be registered in the VCS, you may have personal conventions (e.g., always editing log messages in a temporary file named “.msg”) that you may wish to specify.:

# tell git where my personal ignores are
git config --global core.excludesfile ~/.gitignore
# I use .msg for my long commit logs, and Emacs makes backups in
# files ending with ~
# these are globs, not regular expressions
echo '*~' >> ~/.gitignore
echo '.msg' >> ~/.gitignore

If you use multiple branches, as with the other VCSes, you can save a lot of space by putting all objects in a common object store. This also can save download time, if the origins of the branches were in different repositories, because objects are shared across branches in your repository even if they were not present in the upstream repositories. git is very space- and time-efficient and applies a number of optimizations automatically, so this configuration is optional. (Examples are omitted.)

svn

svn checkout http://svn.python.org/projects/python/trunk
cd trunk
# Edit some code.
echo "The cake is a lie!" > README
# Since svn lacks support for local commits, we fake it with patches.
svn diff >> commit-1.diff
svn diff >> patch-1.diff
# Upload the patch-1 to bugs.python.org.
# Receive reviewer comments.
# Edit some code.
echo "The cake is real!" > README
# Since svn lacks support for local commits, we fake it with patches.
svn diff >> commit-2.diff
svn diff >> patch-2.diff
# Upload patch-2 to bugs.python.org

bzr

bzr branch http://code.python.org/python/trunk
cd trunk
# Edit some code.
bzr commit -m 'Stuff I did'
bzr send -o bundle
# Upload bundle to bugs.python.org
# Receive reviewer comments
# Edit some code
bzr commit -m 'Respond to reviewer comments'
bzr send -o bundle
# Upload updated bundle to bugs.python.org

The bundle file is like a super-patch. It can be read by patch(1) but it contains additional metadata so that it can be fed to bzr merge to produce a fully usable branch completely with history. See Patch Review section below.

hg

hg clone http://code.python.org/hg/trunk
cd trunk
# Edit some code.
hg commit -m "Stuff I did"
hg outgoing -p > fixes.patch
# Upload patch to bugs.python.org
# Receive reviewer comments
# Edit some code
hg commit -m "Address reviewer comments."
hg outgoing -p > additional-fixes.patch
# Upload patch to bugs.python.org

While hg outgoing does not have the flag for it, most Mercurial commands support git’s extended patch format through a --git command. This can be set in one’s .hgrc file so that all commands that generate a patch use the extended format.

git

The patches could be created with git diff master > stuff-i-did.patch, too, but git format-patch | git am knows some tricks (empty files, renames, etc) that ordinary patch can’t handle. git grabs “Stuff I did” out of the commit message to create the file name 0001-Stuff-I-did.patch. See Patch Review below for a description of the git-format-patch format.

# Get the mainline code.
git clone git://code.python.org/python/trunk
cd trunk
# Edit some code.
git commit -a -m 'Stuff I did.'
# Create patch for my changes (i.e, relative to master).
git format-patch master
git tag stuff-v1
# Upload 0001-Stuff-I-did.patch to bugs.python.org.
# Time passes ... receive reviewer comments.
# Edit more code.
git commit -a -m 'Address reviewer comments.'
# Make an add-on patch to apply on top of the original.
git format-patch stuff-v1
# Upload 0001-Address-reviewer-comments.patch to bugs.python.org.

svn

# Assume the change to revert is in revision 40
svn merge -c -40 .
# Resolve conflicts, if any.
svn commit -m "Reverted revision 40"

bzr

# Assume the change to revert is in revision 40
bzr merge -r 40..39
# Resolve conflicts, if any.
bzr commit -m "Reverted revision 40"

Note that if the change you want revert is the last one that was made, you can just use bzr uncommit.

hg

# Assume the change to revert is in revision 9150dd9c6d30
hg backout --merge -r 9150dd9c6d30
# Resolve conflicts, if any.
hg commit -m "Reverted changeset 9150dd9c6d30"
hg push

Note, you can use “hg rollback” and “hg strip” to revert changes you committed in your local repository, but did not yet push to other repositories.

git

# Assume the change to revert is the grandfather of a revision tagged "newhotness".
git revert newhotness~2
# Resolve conflicts if any.  If there are no conflicts, the commit
# will be done automatically by "git revert", which prompts for a log.
git commit -m "Reverted changeset 9150dd9c6d30."
git push

svn

Subversion does not exactly fit into this development style very well as there are no such thing as a “branch” as has been defined in this PEP. Instead a developer either needs to create another checkout for testing a patch or create a branch on the server. Up to this point, core developers have not taken the “branch on the server” approach to dealing with individual patches. For this scenario the assumption will be the developer creates a local checkout of the trunk to work with.:

cp -r trunk issue0000
cd issue0000
patch -p0 < __patch__
# Review patch.
svn commit -m "Some patch."
cd ..
rm -r issue0000

Another option is to only have a single checkout running at any one time and use svn diff along with svn revert -R to store away independent changes you may have made.

bzr

bzr branch trunk issueNNNN
# Download `patch` bundle from Roundup
bzr merge patch
# Review patch
bzr commit -m'Patch NNN by So N. So' --fixes python:NNNN
bzr push bzr+ssh://me@code.python.org/trunk
rm -rf ../issueNNNN

Alternatively, since you’re probably going to commit these changes to the trunk, you could just do a checkout. That would give you a local working tree while the branch (i.e. all revisions) would continue to live on the server. This is similar to the svn model and might allow you to more quickly review the patch. There’s no need for the push in this case.:

bzr checkout trunk issueNNNN
# Download `patch` bundle from Roundup
bzr merge patch
# Review patch
bzr commit -m'Patch NNNN by So N. So' --fixes python:NNNN
rm -rf ../issueNNNN

hg

hg clone trunk issue0000
cd issue0000
# If the patch was generated using hg export, the user name of the
# submitter is automatically recorded. Otherwise,
# use hg import --no-commit submitted.diff and commit with
# hg commit -u "Firstname Lastname <[email protected]>"
hg import submitted.diff
# Review patch.
hg push ssh://alexandre@code.python.org/hg/trunk/

git

We assume a patch created by git-format-patch. This is a Unix mbox file containing one or more patches, each formatted as an RFC 2822 message. git-am interprets each message as a commit as follows. The author of the patch is taken from the From: header, the date from the Date header. The commit log is created by concatenating the content of the subject line, a blank line, and the message body up to the start of the patch.:

cd trunk
# Create a branch in case we don't like the patch.
# This checkout takes zero time, since the workspace is left in
# the same state as the master branch.
git checkout -b patch-review
# Download patch from bugs.python.org to submitted.patch.
git am < submitted.patch
# Review and approve patch.
# Merge into master and push.
git checkout master
git merge patch-review
git push

svn

Because of Python’s use of svnmerge, changes start with the trunk (2.7) and then get merged to the release version of 2.6. To get the change into the 3.x series, the change is merged into 3.1, fixed up, and then merged into 3.0 (2.7 -> 2.6; 2.7 -> 3.1 -> 3.0).

This is in contrast to a port-forward strategy where the patch would have been added to 2.6 and then pulled forward into newer versions (2.6 -> 2.7 -> 3.0 -> 3.1).

# Assume patch applied to 2.7 in revision 0000.
cd release26-maint
svnmerge merge -r 0000
# Resolve merge conflicts and make sure patch works.
svn commit -F svnmerge-commit-message.txt  # revision 0001.
cd ../py3k
svnmerge merge -r 0000
# Same as for 2.6, except Misc/NEWS changes are reverted.
svn revert Misc/NEWS
svn commit -F svnmerge-commit-message.txt  # revision 0002.
cd ../release30-maint
svnmerge merge -r 0002
svn commit -F svnmerge-commit-message.txt  # revision 0003.

bzr

Bazaar is pretty straightforward here, since it supports cherry picking revisions manually. In the example below, we could have given a revision id instead of a revision number, but that’s usually not necessary. Martin Pool suggests “We’d generally recommend doing the fix first in the oldest supported branch, and then merging it forward to the later releases.”:

# Assume patch applied to 2.7 in revision 0000
cd release26-maint
bzr merge ../trunk -c 0000
# Resolve conflicts and make sure patch works
bzr commit -m 'Back port patch NNNN'
bzr push bzr+ssh://me@code.python.org/trunk
cd ../py3k
bzr merge ../trunk -r 0000
# Same as for 2.6 except Misc/NEWS changes are reverted
bzr revert Misc/NEWS
bzr commit -m 'Forward port patch NNNN'
bzr push bzr+ssh://me@code.python.org/py3k

hg

Mercurial, like other DVCS, does not well support the current workflow used by Python core developers to backport patches. Right now, bug fixes are first applied to the development mainline (i.e., trunk), then back-ported to the maintenance branches and forward-ported, as necessary, to the py3k branch. This workflow requires the ability to cherry-pick individual changes. Mercurial’s transplant extension provides this ability. Here is an example of the scenario using this workflow:

cd release26-maint
# Assume patch applied to 2.7 in revision 0000
hg transplant -s ../trunk 0000
# Resolve conflicts, if any.
cd ../py3k
hg pull ../trunk
hg merge
hg revert Misc/NEWS
hg commit -m "Merged trunk"
hg push

In the above example, transplant acts much like the current svnmerge command. When transplant is invoked without the revision, the command launches an interactive loop useful for transplanting multiple changes. Another useful feature is the –filter option which can be used to modify changesets programmatically (e.g., it could be used for removing changes to Misc/NEWS automatically).

Alternatively to the traditional workflow, we could avoid transplanting changesets by committing bug fixes to the oldest supported release, then merge these fixes upward to the more recent branches.

cd release25-maint
hg import fix_some_bug.diff
# Review patch and run test suite. Revert if failure.
hg push
cd ../release26-maint
hg pull ../release25-maint
hg merge
# Resolve conflicts, if any. Then, review patch and run test suite.
hg commit -m "Merged patches from release25-maint."
hg push
cd ../trunk
hg pull ../release26-maint
hg merge
# Resolve conflicts, if any, then review.
hg commit -m "Merged patches from release26-maint."
hg push

Although this approach makes the history non-linear and slightly more difficult to follow, it encourages fixing bugs across all supported releases. Furthermore, it scales better when there is many changes to backport, because we do not need to seek the specific revision IDs to merge.

git

In git I would have a workspace which contains all of the relevant master repository branches. git cherry-pick doesn’t work across repositories; you need to have the branches in the same repository.

# Assume patch applied to 2.7 in revision release27~3 (4th patch back from tip).
cd integration
git checkout release26
git cherry-pick release27~3
# If there are conflicts, resolve them, and commit those changes.
# git commit -a -m "Resolve conflicts."
# Run test suite. If fixes are necessary, record as a separate commit.
# git commit -a -m "Fix code causing test failures."
git checkout master
git cherry-pick release27~3
# Do any conflict resolution and test failure fixups.
# Revert Misc/NEWS changes.
git checkout HEAD^ -- Misc/NEWS
git commit -m 'Revert cherry-picked Misc/NEWS changes.' Misc/NEWS
# Push both ports.
git push release26 master

If you are regularly merging (rather than cherry-picking) from a given branch, then you can block a given commit from being accidentally merged in the future by merging, then reverting it. This does not prevent a cherry-pick from pulling in the unwanted patch, and this technique requires blocking everything that you don’t want merged. I’m not sure if this differs from svn on this point.

cd trunk
# Merge in the alpha tested code.
git merge experimental-branch
# We don't want the 3rd-to-last commit from the experimental-branch,
# and we don't want it to ever be merged.
# The notation "^N" means Nth parent of the current commit. Thus HEAD^2^1^1
# means the first parent of the first parent of the second parent of HEAD.
git revert HEAD^2^1^1
# Propagate the merge and the prohibition to the public repository.
git push

svn

# Create branch.
svn copy svn+ssh://pythondev@svn.python.org/python/trunk svn+ssh://pythondev@svn.python.org/python/branches/NewHotness
svn checkout svn+ssh://pythondev@svn.python.org/python/branches/NewHotness
cd NewHotness
svnmerge init
svn commit -m "Initialize svnmerge."
# Pull in changes from other developers.
svn update
# Pull in trunk and merge to the branch.
svnmerge merge
svn commit -F svnmerge-commit-message.txt

This scenario is incomplete as the decision for what DVCS to go with was made before the work was complete.

svn

To make up for svn’s lack of cheap branching, it has a changelist option to associate a file with a single changelist. This is not as powerful as being able to associate at the commit level. There is also no way to express dependencies between changelists.

cp -r trunk issue0000
cd issue0000
# Edit some code.
echo "The cake is a lie!" > README
svn changelist A README
# Edit some other code.
echo "I own Python!" > LICENSE
svn changelist B LICENSE
svn ci -m "Tell it how it is." --changelist B
# Edit changelist A some more.
svn ci -m "Speak the truth." --changelist A
cd ..
rm -rf issue0000

bzr

Here’s an approach that uses bzr shelf (now a standard part of bzr) to squirrel away some changes temporarily while you take a detour to fix the socket bugs.

bzr branch trunk bug-0000
cd bug-0000
# Edit some code. Dang, we need to fix the socket module.
bzr shelve --all
# Edit some code.
bzr commit -m "Socket module fixes"
# Detour over, now resume fixing urllib
bzr unshelve
# Edit some code

Another approach uses the loom plugin. Looms can greatly simplify working on dependent branches because they automatically take care of the stacking dependencies for you. Imagine looms as a stack of dependent branches (called “threads” in loom parlance), with easy ways to move up and down the stack of threads, merge changes up the stack to descendant threads, create diffs between threads, etc. Occasionally, you may need or want to export your loom threads into separate branches, either for review or commit. Higher threads incorporate all the changes in the lower threads, automatically.

bzr branch trunk bug-0000
cd bug-0000
bzr loomify --base trunk
bzr create-thread fix-urllib
# Edit some code. Dang, we need to fix the socket module first.
bzr commit -m "Checkpointing my work so far"
bzr down-thread
bzr create-thread fix-socket
# Edit some code
bzr commit -m "Socket module fixes"
bzr up-thread
# Manually resolve conflicts if necessary
bzr commit -m 'Merge in socket fixes'
# Edit me some more code
bzr commit -m "Now that socket is fixed, complete the urllib fixes"
bzr record done

For bonus points, let’s say someone else fixes the socket module in exactly the same way you just did. Perhaps this person even grabbed your fix-socket thread and applied just that to the trunk. You’d like to be able to merge their changes into your loom and delete your now-redundant fix-socket thread.

bzr down-thread trunk
# Get all new revisions to the trunk. If you've done things
# correctly, this will succeed without conflict.
bzr pull
bzr up-thread
# See? The fix-socket thread is now identical to the trunk
bzr commit -m 'Merge in trunk changes'
bzr diff -r thread: | wc -l # returns 0
bzr combine-thread
bzr up-thread
# Resolve any conflicts
bzr commit -m 'Merge trunk'
# Now our top-thread has an up-to-date trunk and just the urllib fix.

hg

One approach is to use the shelve extension; this extension is not included with Mercurial, but it is easy to install. With shelve, you can select changes to put temporarily aside.

hg clone trunk issue0000
cd issue0000
# Edit some code (e.g. urllib).
hg shelve
# Select changes to put aside
# Edit some other code (e.g. socket).
hg commit
hg unshelve
# Complete initial fix.
hg commit
cd ../trunk
hg pull ../issue0000
hg merge
hg commit
rm -rf ../issue0000

Several other way to approach this scenario with Mercurial. Alexander Solovyov presented a few alternative approaches on Mercurial’s mailing list.

git

cd trunk
# Edit some code in urllib.
# Discover a bug in socket, want to fix that first.
# So save away our current work.
git stash
# Edit some code, commit some changes.
git commit -a -m "Completed fix of socket."
# Restore the in-progress work on urllib.
git stash apply
# Edit me some more code, commit some more fixes.
git commit -a -m "Complete urllib fixes."
# And push both patches to the public repository.
git push

Bonus points: suppose you took your time, and someone else fixes socket in the same way you just did, and landed that in the trunk. In that case, your push will fail because your branch is not up-to-date. If the fix was a one-liner, there’s a very good chance that it’s exactly the same, character for character. git would notice that, and you are done; git will silently merge them.

Suppose we’re not so lucky:

# Update your branch.
git pull git://code.python.org/public/trunk master

# git has fetched all the necessary data, but reports that the
# merge failed.  We discover the nearly-duplicated patch.
# Neither our version of the master branch nor the workspace has
# been touched.  Revert our socket patch and pull again:
git revert HEAD^
git pull git://code.python.org/public/trunk master

Like Bazaar and Mercurial, git has extensions to manage stacks of patches. You can use the original Quilt by Andrew Morton, or there is StGit (“stacked git”) which integrates patch-tracking for large sets of patches into the VCS in a way similar to Mercurial Queues or Bazaar looms.

bzr

It will change, but not substantially so. When doing the maintenance branch, we’ll just push to the new location instead of doing an svn cp. Tags are totally different, since in svn they are directory copies, but in bzr (and I’m guessing hg), they are just symbolic names for revisions on a particular branch. The release.py script will have to change to use bzr commands instead. It’s possible that because DVCS (in particular, bzr) does cherry picking and merging well enough that we’ll be able to create the maint branches sooner. It would be a useful exercise to try to do a release off the bzr/hg mirrors.

hg

Clearly, details specific to Subversion in PEP 101 and in the release script will need to be updated. In particular, release tagging and maintenance branches creation process will have to be modified to use Mercurial’s features; this will simplify and streamline certain aspects of the release process. For example, tagging and re-tagging a release will become a trivial operation since a tag, in Mercurial, is simply a symbolic name for a given revision.

git

It will change, but not substantially so. When doing the maintenance branch, we’ll just git push to the new location instead of doing an svn cp. Tags are totally different, since in svn they are directory copies, but in git they are just symbolic names for revisions, as are branches. (The difference between a tag and a branch is that tags refer to a particular commit, and will never change unless you use git tag -f to force them to move. The checked-out branch, on the other hand, is automatically updated by git commit.) The release.py script will have to change to use git commands instead. With git I would create a (local) maintenance branch as soon as the release engineer is chosen. Then I’d “git pull” until I didn’t like a patch, when it would be “git pull; git revert ugly-patch”, until it started to look like the sensible thing is to fork off, and start doing “git cherry-pick” on the good patches.