If `stable` seems bad, is there another name we could use to avoid
renaming? Like `maint` for "maintenance"?
I don't love `maint`, because it's too close to `main`, and it seems
like `main` has an edge in familiarity if not in meaningfulness.
`legacy`?
Unless we can come up with something better than `stable`, it seems like
the least-worst alternative. But there's all week to come up with
something better!
Cheers,
R
On 12 Jul 2021, at 11:13, Martin Simmons wrote:
On Mon, 12 Jul 2021 08:59:16 -0500, Robert Goldman said:
As we move forward, and try to add some new facilities to ASDF, this
seems like a good time to revise the branching structure that we use.
In particular, I would like to add a `stable` branch that will permit
continuation of the 3.3 release series, the need for which is
illustrated by Mark E's recent merge request.
OK, but once you name something "stable", can you change it very much?
What
happens when the development branch contains something that is stable
enough
to call stable again? If you intend this branch to be the 3.3 release
series
then using numbers in the name might be preferable.
If we are going to make that change, it seems like a good time to
rename
the `master` branch to either `main` or `dev`. Any preferences?
I suggest calling it main like many other projects, unless you intend
to do
all development on a non-default branch and use main for something
else.
Using the same name as other projects makes it easier to find it.
--
Martin Simmons
LispWorks Ltd
http://www.lispworks.com/
