On Wed, May 06, 2009 at 01:13:07AM +0300, Zeeshan Ali (Khattak) wrote: > On Wed, May 6, 2009 at 12:46 AM, Olav Vitters <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Wed, May 06, 2009 at 12:33:59AM +0300, Felipe Contreras wrote: > >> >> >> Imagine someone who has been on a GNOME hiatus or is a new comer. > >> >> >> What > >> >> >> would be easier to understand? '1-2' or 'stable'? > >> >> > > >> >> > 'stable' was already discussed. Within GNOME 2.20, 2.22, 2.24, 2.26 > >> >> > etc > >> >> > are stable. So it isn't clear. > >> >> > >> >> The latest one, of course. > >> >> > >> >> You don't need branches for targets that are not going to move. > >> >> Branches are for moving targets, tags are for fixed ones. > >> > > >> > That is just confusing. Really, I don't see why you don't see this. > >> > >> That's just how git works: branches and tags are mere pointers. > >> There's no difference in the object storage, the only difference is > >> logical, you use branches in a way, tags in another way. > > > > Don't care about Git workings. > > Don't you think that is much more relevant here than your opinions?
Why should it? I can ask if branches/tags can be renamed and so on. Plus if stuff can be explained in text instead of git commands. I don't like the suggestion that I am not allowed to say that I want an explanation. > > I care about understanding a branch name. > > Deleting branches sounds really bad (aside from purely symbolical > > 'stable'). > > > >> You can do stuff like: > > > > I don't understand Git. > > If you haven't noticed, we are talking of *GIT* branches and tags > here. The discussion was actually about a rule on *GIT* pushes. Don't suggest I didn't knew that. I want to know implications for users of git.gnome.org. Just because it is Git, doesn't mean we shouldn't be careful when changing things or I am not allowed to make comments. -- Regards, Olav _______________________________________________ desktop-devel-list mailing list [email protected] http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
