One thing we might wish to include in the contribution guidelines would be the branch which contributors should contribute to. As it is we say they should create an issue and a pull request which matches that issue, but there are some branch management issues which would have minor effects on this. If we have a branch for the next version of the convention, say `1.8`, should everybody base their branches off of there? Otherwise, if they're always branching off of `master`, there's the possibility that they'll fiddle with areas which will produce conflicts later, e.g. the author list or the version number.
Alternatively, we could say that the files which contain such common metadata related to the convention itself shouldn't be edited in a topical PR, but rather only be changed editorially in preparation for publishing a new version. -- You are receiving this because you commented. Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/cf-convention/cf-conventions/issues/130#issuecomment-406339131
