@davidhassell > An advantage of this over using master is that accepted issues can be merged > into the branch prior to release, and so be picked up by PRs for other, newer > issues.
Please can you elaborate on this statement? It seems to me that it is fine to merge accepted issues onto `master`, that this should be the approach that is adopted. What makes you make the statement that having an explicit branch for a next version allows merging accepted issues, suggesting that targeting `master` means that accepted changes would not be able to be merged? thank you mark -- 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-412903700
