>-----Original Message----- >From: Franklin, Matthew B. [mailto:[email protected]] >Sent: Tuesday, May 15, 2012 10:11 AM >To: [email protected] >Subject: RE: Removing Bootstrap Branch > >>-----Original Message----- >>From: Ate Douma [mailto:[email protected]] >>Sent: Tuesday, May 15, 2012 9:10 AM >>To: [email protected] >>Subject: Re: Removing Bootstrap Branch >> >>On 05/15/2012 02:31 PM, Franklin, Matthew B. wrote: >>> Now that the bootstrap branch has been integrated into trunk, it needs to >>be deleted. Assuming lazy consensus, I will delete the branch today or >>tomorrow. >> >>Although I don't really have an objection to delete that branch, why would it >>'need' to be deleted? >> >>Commonly branches are simply left as they are, retaining east access to their >>history for who might need to review it still sometime later. >>In this case that might not be so much of a need for, so I'm personally fine >>with deleting this branch (or not). But for the more generic case I think it >>might be better not making that a default/expected process. > >In the case where the branch was created for the purpose of working a large >new feature in that would have left trunk in an inconsistent state, I think >deletion once completed is appropriate. In this case, the branch has no >functional use once the feature is reintegrated. > >SVN will keep all the history in prior revisions, so we won't lose any >information; but, it won't be visible when browsing the HEAD. > >For other branch cases, I could see leaving it open. In the end, it isn't a >big >deal either way, unless we get a large number of branches. > >Thoughts?
+1 for deleting the Bootstrap branch, for the specific reason Matt mentioned above. Also because I am kind of a neat freak and like to reduce clutter :) Tony > >> >>Ate >> >>> >>> -Matt >
