Ok I agree as well.
On Fri, Jun 27, 2014 at 2:22 PM, Andrew <[email protected]> wrote: > I also like the git flow branching model and have been using it on project > for a number of years > > > On Fri, Jun 27, 2014 at 1:19 PM, Tim Williams <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > On Fri, Jun 27, 2014 at 1:13 PM, Aaron McCurry <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > On Fri, Jun 27, 2014 at 10:24 AM, Andrew <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > >> Aaron, > > >> The link you provided looks like a good strategy for merging 0.2 into > > >> master. > > >> My question is whether this is a good time to switch? Is 0.2 released > > yet? > > >> > > > > > > I think that we should do this when we release 0.2.2 (or 0.2.3 since > the > > > 0.2.2 was kind of a bust on the release). > > > > > > What do you think? > > > > +1, also on going to 0.2.3 > > > > >> Shouldn't master branch reflect the "released" version of blur? > > >> > > > > > > Well, we haven't had much of a method to our branches/tags/or releases. > > I > > > think it would be good to come up with some rules that are written > down. > > I > > > feel that others will have a stronger feelings on how the right way to > > > manage versions of Blur. > > > > I don't have strong feelings but this seems sane and is already > > written down(scroll down to Release branches): > > > > http://nvie.com/posts/a-successful-git-branching-model/ > > > > --tim > > >
