Hi folks,

Since there have been no objections to this, I'm going to switch around the
branches:

master   becomes  v2
maint-1.16.2   becomes  master

Thx
Dan


On Sat, 8 Sep 2018 at 17:38, Andi Huber <[email protected]> wrote:

> Comment inline ...
>
> On 2018/09/06 21:08:23, Dan Haywood <[email protected]> wrote:
> > Happy to use 'v2' for 2.0.0 development.
> >
> > Any other opinions?  I'll look to switch after the weekend otherwise (ie
> > give it 72 hours)
> >
> > Ta
> > Dan
> >
> > On Wed, 5 Sep 2018 at 07:42 Andi Huber <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > > Thx Dan.
> > > I'd like to propose a very short name for the main branch to use for
> > > version 2:
> > >
> > > 'v2'
> > >
> > > Cheers, Andi!
> > >
> > > On 2018/09/05 06:32:25, Dan Haywood <[email protected]>
> wrote:
> > > > Hi folks,
> > > >
> > > > At the moment the "master" branch holds the development that Andi is
> > > > leading for 2.0.0-M2.  We also have "maint-1.16.2" - which is where
> any
> > > > development for a future 1.16.3 goes on.
> > > >
> > > > However, our website documentation is published from "maint-1.16.2",
> but
> > > if
> > > > we get doc pull requests (via the "Edit this page") then they are
> raised
> > > > against "master.  We recently had a few doc PRs which Andi applied,
> but
> > > it
> > > > occurs to me that these won't see "the light of day" unless I cherry
> pick
> > > > them back to "maint-1.16.2" branch and re-release.
>
> Just out of curiosity, is this something that could be configured, in a
> way that PRs regarding the adoc files get filed against an arbitrary
> branch? Reason is, that I just merged a PR - kindly provided by Gabriel -
> against 'master', which was actual code! (and by the way: Hurray!!!)
>
> > > >
> > > > Realistically we're going to be working on 2.0.0-Mn milestone
> releases
> > > for
> > > > a good few months yet, so I'd like to switch the branches back, ie:
> > > >
> > > > master is renamed to dev-2.0.0  (say ... or maybe something easier to
> > > type,
> > > > eg "develop")
> > > > maint-1.16.2 is renamed back to master
> > > >
> > > > I mentioned this to Andi offline, he's happy with the proposal, but
> > > > obviously this is a discussion to be had publicly on this dev@
> mailing
> > > list.
> > > >
> > > > Any concerns, please reply, otherwise will use lazy consensus.
> > > >
> > > > Thx
> > > > Dan
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > DISCLAIMER: This e-mail is from Haywood Associates Ltd (Registered
> Number
> > > > 3525455) and it and its attachments may be confidential and are
> intended
> > > > solely for the use of the individual to whom it is addressed.  Any
> > > > unauthorised use or dissemination of this communication is strictly
> > > > prohibited. Any information provided to Haywood Associates Ltd shall
> be
> > > > retained and used in accordance with our Privacy Statement at
> > > > http://www.haywood-associates.co.uk/privacy.  If you have received
> this
> > > > communication in error, please immediately notify the sender by
> return
> > > > e-mail message and delete all copies of the original communication.
> > > >
> > >
> > --
> > DISCLAIMER: This e-mail is from Haywood Associates Ltd (Registered Number
> > 3525455) and it and its attachments may be confidential and are intended
> > solely for the use of the individual to whom it is addressed.  Any
> > unauthorised use or dissemination of this communication is strictly
> > prohibited. Any information provided to Haywood Associates Ltd shall be
> > retained and used in accordance with our Privacy Statement at
> > http://www.haywood-associates.co.uk/privacy.  If you have received this
> > communication in error, please immediately notify the sender by return
> > e-mail message and delete all copies of the original communication.
> >
>

Reply via email to