By just do it, I assume you mean: - Contact delete master where not needed - Rename master to main when needed - Contact INFRA to change the default branch - Update README and CI jobs as needed
Across *all* geode repos. Anthony > On Jun 26, 2020, at 9:38 AM, Mark Hanson <mhan...@pivotal.io> wrote: > > +1 to delete. No good reason to keep it that I know of. I think I am the > third +1 with no -1s so just do it. > > Thanks, > Mark > >> On Jun 26, 2020, at 9:13 AM, Alexander Murmann <amurm...@apache.org> wrote: >> >> +1 to deleting. Given we tag everything properly on the other branches, I >> don't see the need for it either. >> >> On Fri, Jun 26, 2020 at 9:03 AM Alberto Bustamante Reyes >> <alberto.bustamante.re...@est.tech> wrote: >> >>> +1 for deleting master branch. An also for updating the wiki page about >>> branching that Alberto pointed out. >>> ________________________________ >>> De: Bruce Schuchardt <bru...@vmware.com> >>> Enviado: viernes, 26 de junio de 2020 17:37 >>> Para: dev@geode.apache.org <dev@geode.apache.org> >>> Asunto: Re: Fate of master branch >>> >>> Let's just delete it. I need to do that in my own repos as well. >>> >>> On 6/26/20, 8:05 AM, "Blake Bender" <bbl...@vmware.com> wrote: >>> >>> Apologies if this has been addressed already and I missed it. In >>> keeping with other OSS projects, I believe it’s time we did something about >>> removing the insensitive term master from Geode repositories. >>> >>> One choice a lot of projects appear to be going with is a simple >>> rename from master • main. In our own case, however, master isn’t really >>> in use for anything vital. We track releases with a tag and a branch to >>> backport fixes to, and the develop branch is the “source of truth” >>> latest-and-greatest version of the code. We could thus simply delete >>> master with no loss I’m aware of. Any opinions? >>> >>> Thanks, >>> >>> Blake >>> >>> >>> >
