Let’s not branch out the code just yet :) But tags are a good idea!
Best Jan -- On 27 Oct 2013, at 14:19 , Andy Wenk <[email protected]> wrote: > +1 for Benoits proposal. > > Regarding "best practices" or "subprojects" mentioned, I would like to > share what we do at work. We have destroyed the master branch from our main > applications. Our customer has around 5 bigger releases each year. So we > started to create the branches, 2013_april, 2013_july, 2013_september and > so on. These are our "main" branches we create feature branches from. > Merging is always possible from lower to higher month. > > So deriving from this scenario (what is surely different from CouchDB's > requirements) it "could" be an idea to create three main branches like > doc_master, ui_master and core_master in the same repository. On the other > hand, I guess most of the contributors to a git based project expect to > have a master branch. > > One thing to mention: please, don't use "submodules" because a lot of > people do not understand to handle them ;-) > > Cheers > > Andy > > On 27 October 2013 14:58, Jan Lehnardt <[email protected]> wrote: > >> +1 >> >> Excuse the bikeshed, I’d prefer lowercase tags. >> >> Best >> Jan >> -- >> >> On 27 Oct 2013, at 13:28 , Benoit Chesneau <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> Hi all, >>> >>> I would like to propose that we start to tag our commits. The reasonning >>> behind that is to distinct easily the changes concerning the doc, the ui >>> and the core and filter them immediately and force us to make a change >>> atomic. So I would like to propose that we tag the commit line with >>> >>> [DOC] >>> [UI] >>> [CORE] >>> >>> other ? Another way to distinct the changes would also be to have all of >>> these as subprojects eventually but it may require too much changes. >>> >>> Thoughts? >>> >>> - benoit >> >> > > > -- > Andy Wenk > Hamburg - Germany > RockIt!
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
