bq. the branch "hbase-6721" is not related to the actual patch(es)
In that case, it is Okay to drop this branch. On Mon, Mar 21, 2016 at 11:51 AM, Sean Busbey <[email protected]> wrote: > We should not accumulate feature branches indefinitely as it makes the repo > increasingly unwieldy. > > AFAICT, the branch "hbase-6721" is not related to the actual patch(es) that > went in to master for the HBASE-6721 implementation. It will not help with > an accurate backport. > > On Mon, Mar 21, 2016 at 1:22 PM, Ted Yu <[email protected]> wrote: > > > For HBASE-6721, is there definitive decision not to backport to branch-1 > ? > > > > If not, keeping history for its branch is very helpful for backport. > > > > On Mon, Mar 21, 2016 at 11:14 AM, Enis Söztutar <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > What is our policy for deleting feature branches? For example, > > HBASE-10070, > > > HBASE-6721, etc are all committed, so we do not need the branches. We > > > should only keep them around if we think that keeping history is > > important > > > (which I am not so sure). > > > > > > Enis > > > > > > On Mon, Mar 21, 2016 at 11:03 AM, Sean Busbey <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > > > > > > I'd like to clean out some of our defunct git branches. > > > > > > > > The current list I'm proposing is in JIRA: > > > > > > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-15006 > > > > > > > > > > > > If you have a branch you're keeping around and haven't touched in > some > > > > time, please take a look and make sure I'm not including it. > > > > > > > > > > > > Similarly, if you know you had a feature branch at some point in the > > > > distant past and you're not interested in using it any more, please > > take > > > a > > > > look and make sure it's listed. > > > > -- > > > > busbey > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > busbey >
