[GNC-dev] Git branches

[Brian Rater]

Future?

On Thu, Mar 23, 2023 at 8:57 PM John Ralls <jralls at ceridwen.us> wrote:

> We're 3 days away from releasing 5.0 and so 4 days away from shuffling the
> branches. Absent any objections I intend to rename the current "master" to
> "stable" and make it the default branch on Github. Bugfixes and
> minor-to-medium features can go to stable. I'll rename maint to
> archive/maint so that nobody is tempted to commit to it any more.
>
> We have a little time to discuss the medium-to-major branch name. We don't
> need it until someone has a medium-to-major feature branch to merge in.
> While "unstable" is the logical opposite of "stable" it's also shares too
> many letters, though unlike "main" and "maint" at least the extra letters
> are upfront so you're less likely to get bitten by completion. I'm inclined
> toward "development". "devel" would be OK if spell-check didn't keep trying
> to turn it into "level".
>
> Regards,
> John Ralls
>
>
> > On Nov 18, 2022, at 9:08 AM, john <jralls at ceridwen.us> wrote:
> >
> > We could pinch from Debian and use stable, testing, and unstable, where
> testing is the alpha/beta pre-major-release weeklies.
> >
> > Regards,
> > John Ralls
> >
> >
> >> On Nov 18, 2022, at 7:55 AM, Geert Janssens <geert.gnucash at kobaltwit.be>
> wrote:
> >>
> >> I'm fine with just doing the simple name change for our two primary
> branches as it's the option of least effort.
> >>
> >> I'd rather have a different name than "main" though. It's a bit
> ambiguous and like "master" suggesting this branch is somehow more
> important than the other long-term branch "maint". I'd rather have names
> that help guide contributors to the right branch to work from. I don't
> think there's a silver bullet here though, but some names may give more of
> a hint than others. Some suggestions:
> >>
> >> * "current" vs "future" as shorthands for "current-release-series" or
> "future-release-series"
> >> * "maintenance" ("maint") vs "development" ("devel")
> >> * "stable" vs "development"
> >>
> >> That said, I'm also very interested in the single branch model as
> alternative. Discussion on that is for another message.
> >>
> >> Regards,
> >>
> >> Geert
> >>
> >> Op maandag 14 november 2022 20:59:26 CET schreef john:
> >>>> On Nov 14, 2022, at 11:11 AM, Alex Aycinena <alex.aycinena at gmail.com>
> >>>> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> how about a simple change, like calling it 'main' rather than
> >>>> 'master' and keeping the existing pattern for branches.
> >>>
> >>> That would be OK as long as long as the two names aren't similar. main
> and
> >>> stable would be OK; with main and maint one is far too likely to do
> >>> something to the wrong branch.
> >>>
> >>> Regards,
> >>> John Ralls
> >>>
> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>> gnucash-devel mailing list
> >>> gnucash-devel at gnucash.org
> >>> https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-devel
> >>
> >>
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > gnucash-devel mailing list
> > gnucash-devel at gnucash.org
> > https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-devel
>
> _______________________________________________
> gnucash-devel mailing list
> gnucash-devel at gnucash.org
> https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-devel
>