generally I think deleting branches we no longer need is helpful because most git UIs differentiate between branches (people are working on things) and tags (archival purposes).
On Fri, May 22, 2015 at 1:45 PM, Andrew Purtell <[email protected]> wrote: > If you do decide to delete branch-1.1.0 the tag refs would remain. > > > On Fri, May 22, 2015 at 11:33 AM, Nick Dimiduk <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > On Fri, May 22, 2015 at 11:28 AM, Andrew Purtell <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > > > > FWIW, I make local branches for RCs but only push up tags I make from > > > commits on the local branch, not a ref for the branch. > > > > > > > Oh, interesting. Would that have been the more correct action for me to > > have taken with the RC approach I used? If I delete branch-1.1.0, the > tags > > would remain? I don't think deleting the branch is helpful. Sorry about > the > > confusion though, I should have sent a note to dev explaining myself > when I > > took the action. > > > > -n > > > > On Fri, May 22, 2015 at 11:26 AM, Andrew Purtell <[email protected]> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > Pardon, that was an unfortunate typo. I meant branch-1.1.0. > > > > > > > > > > > > On Fri, May 22, 2015 at 11:06 AM, Nick Dimiduk <[email protected]> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > >> Don't delete branch-1.1. Let me explain. > > > >> > > > >> branch-1.1.0 was my use in creating rc1+. I created it from the > > 1.1.0rc0 > > > >> tag and spun subsequent RC's as commits on that branch. The idea was > > to > > > >> de-risk further RC's by not bringing in changes that were unrelated > to > > > >> reviewers' criticisms raised on the VOTE thread. Any fixes were > first > > > >> committed to branch-1.1 and then applied to branch-1.1.0 (rc1 was > sunk > > > >> because I had brought back a patch from master instead of > branch-1.1). > > > Now > > > >> that 1.1.0 is released, branch-1.1.0 is effectively dead -- except > for > > > hot > > > >> fix releases; I didn't check but I would expected 1.1.0.1 to have > been > > > cut > > > >> from branch-1.1.0. Further branch-1.1.x patch release will be cut > from > > > >> branch-1.1 as "normal". I may or may not create similar branches for > > > >> further release candidates on the 1.1 line, depending on how RC > > > candidate > > > >> stabilization goes. > > > >> > > > >> When we're ready for 1.2, it will be branched from branch-1, > creating > > > >> branch-1.2. > > > >> > > > >> On Fri, May 22, 2015 at 9:30 AM, Andrew Purtell < > > > [email protected] > > > >> > > > > >> wrote: > > > >> > > > >> > So what should we do with branch-1.1? Delete it? > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > On Fri, May 22, 2015 at 5:09 AM, Ted Yu <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > > >> > > > > >> > > Thanks for the correction, Andrew. > > > >> > > > > > >> > > On Thu, May 21, 2015 at 10:43 PM, Andrew Purtell < > > > >> > [email protected] > > > >> > > > wrote: > > > >> > > > > > >> > >> I think there is some confusion here because I'd expect to > make a > > > 1.2 > > > >> > >> release branch from branch-1, eventually. Branch-1 is even > > > helpfully > > > >> > >> versioned 1.2.0-SNAPSHOT. We have enough branches already > > (smile). > > > >> > >> > > > >> > >> > > > >> > >> > On May 21, 2015, at 10:26 PM, lars hofhansl < > [email protected]> > > > >> wrote: > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > >> > Huh? We should create a 1.2 branch of branch-1. We do not > need > > to > > > >> have > > > >> > >> a branch for every patch release.There's clearly something I am > > > >> missing. > > > >> > >> > -- Lars > > > >> > >> > From: Ted Yu <[email protected]> > > > >> > >> > To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>; lars > > > hofhansl < > > > >> > >> [email protected]> > > > >> > >> > Sent: Thursday, May 21, 2015 10:13 PM > > > >> > >> > Subject: Re: Git branch-1.1.0? > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > >> > branch-1.1 corresponds to the (upcoming) 1.2.0 release. > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > >> > branch-1.1.0 was for the just released 1.1.0 > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > >> > Cheers > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > >> >> On Thu, May 21, 2015 at 10:00 PM, lars hofhansl < > > > [email protected] > > > >> > > > > >> > >> wrote: > > > >> > >> >> > > > >> > >> >> Just saw we have a branch-1.1.0 branch in git. What do we > use > > > that > > > >> > one > > > >> > >> >> for? 1.1.x releases should be tags on branch-1.1, no? > > > >> > >> >> Thanks. > > > >> > >> >> -- Lars > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > >> > > > > -- Sean
